G

Guest

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

This came up tonight in MTGO, and I'm wondering how it would have worked
had my opponent played it differently.

My opponent is attacking with, among other things, a Rhox. He has enough
untapped lands to pay to regenerate it once, but not twice. I block with
a combination of creatures that can kill it while only losing one of
their number. Combat damage goes on the stack and my opponent assigns
all of it to me, since it looks like this will kill me and even if it
didn't, he could just regenerate the Rhox under normal circumstances.

While damage is still on the stack, I Chastise the Rhox.

As it actually played out, my opponent just let the Rhox die; he didn't
even try to regenerate it. I'm wondering now whether that was necessary.
Regeneration removes the creature from combat. If he had regenerated
from the Chastise, would the Rhox still have taken the combat damage and
died again?

As it was, I was kicking myself for not playing the Chastise before
damage hit the stack, temporary though that solution would have been.
Now I'm wondering if I didn't semi-accidentally make a really good play.

****************
Not that the exact details are important, but:

Rhox (Nemesis and Eighth Edition rare)
4GG
Creature - Beast
5/5
You may have Rhox deal its combat damage to defending player as though
it weren't blocked.
2G: Regenerate Rhox.

Chastise (Judgment and Eighth Edition uncommon)
3W
Instant
Destroy target attacking creature. You gain life equal to its power.

*****************
 
G

Guest

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

On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 05:23:56 GMT, Jeff Heikkinen <no.way@jose.org> wrote:
>This came up tonight in MTGO, and I'm wondering how it would have worked
>had my opponent played it differently.
>
>My opponent is attacking with, among other things, a Rhox. He has enough
>untapped lands to pay to regenerate it once, but not twice. I block with
>a combination of creatures that can kill it while only losing one of
>their number. Combat damage goes on the stack and my opponent assigns
>all of it to me, since it looks like this will kill me and even if it
>didn't, he could just regenerate the Rhox under normal circumstances.

Okay.

>While damage is still on the stack, I Chastise the Rhox.
>
>As it actually played out, my opponent just let the Rhox die; he didn't
>even try to regenerate it. I'm wondering now whether that was necessary.
>Regeneration removes the creature from combat. If he had regenerated
>from the Chastise, would the Rhox still have taken the combat damage and
>died again?

Yes. If it got removed from combat BEFORE combat damage got put on the stack,
then it wouldn't have been able to assign any, or have any assigned to it.

But once the combat damage is on the stack, it'll get dealt as assigned, if
that's possible; it doesn't care whether what it gets dealt to is "in combat"
or not. Getting removed from combat, in response to combat damage, doesn't
stop any combat damage FROM you ... and also doesn't stop any combat damage
aimed AT you either.

So yes, he'd've had to regenerate the Rhox twice, for it to survive. Once from
the Chastise, and once from the combat damage hanging over its head while it
gets Chastised.

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.