Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Some questions from an old player

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
June 29, 2005 6:51:57 AM

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

I am player from way back. I got in when Legends was the thing and left
around ice ages. Well, I spoke with some of my old friends and now we
are playing again. I have a few questions that I couldn't remember the
answer to. I guess there's one main one, and here it is...

If you have a creature that has an ability that doesn't require tapping,
can you use it while the creature is tapped? What if that ability is
like "Sacrifice this card to do something" or "take tokens off this card
to do something." Are those different than paying mana for the effect?

What about constant effect artifacts? If one of them is tapped does
it's effect work or not?

Someone please refresh my memory.

Thanks

More about : questions player

Anonymous
June 29, 2005 12:18:31 PM

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

Michael Beattie <mbeattie@alumni.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>I am player from way back. I got in when Legends was the thing and left
>around ice ages. Well, I spoke with some of my old friends and now we
>are playing again. I have a few questions that I couldn't remember the
>answer to.

Note that some of the answers you remember from that period now don't apply.
In particular:
tapped blockers will assign and deal combat damage
you can now respond to combat damage
no more interrupt spells - they're all instants now
tapped artifacts don't "turn off" unless their text says they do
Oracle (available through gatherer.wizards.com, among others) will tell you
what ALL the cards' current texts look like

>I guess there's one main one, and here it is...
>
>If you have a creature that has an ability that doesn't require tapping,
>can you use it while the creature is tapped?

Sure. If the activation cost has the tap-symbol in it, you can't pay that
cost if the creature is tapped; if the activation cost says "Tap a creature
you control", you can't try to pay that cost by trying to tap a tapped
creature. But if it doesn't mention anything about tapping, then you can pay
the cost without having to tap anything, so nothing stops you from playing
the ability.

> What if that ability is
>like "Sacrifice this card to do something" or "take tokens off this card
>to do something." Are those different than paying mana for the effect?

Not particularly. Dragon Engine's "2: ~ gets +1/+0 until end of turn." can be
used while the artifact creature is tapped; Mogg Fanatic's "Sacrifice ~: ~
deals 1 damage to target creature or player." can be used while the Goblin is
tapped; Wild Mongrel's "Discard a card: ~ gets +1/+1 and becomes the color of
your choice until end of turn." can be used while the Hound is tapped. Etc.

>What about constant effect artifacts? If one of them is tapped does
>it's effect work or not?

"its". Yes, it does, unless the card says otherwise. This is a rule that HAS
changed since your day. A couple of artifacts got wording added to make them
still turn off while tapped; of these, Howling Mine and Winter Orb are the
two you will probably have encountered before. Very very few artifacts say
this nowadays - check Oracle (see above) if you want to know for a specific
one, but it's very likely it won't say 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.
Anonymous
June 29, 2005 1:09:06 PM

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

One of the voices in my head - or was it Michael Beattie? - just said...
> I am player from way back. I got in when Legends was the thing and left
> around ice ages. Well, I spoke with some of my old friends and now we
> are playing again. I have a few questions that I couldn't remember the
> answer to. I guess there's one main one, and here it is...
>
> If you have a creature that has an ability that doesn't require tapping,
> can you use it while the creature is tapped?

Yes.

> What if that ability is
> like "Sacrifice this card to do something"

Doesn't make a difference.

> or "take tokens off this card
> to do something."

That doesn't make sense - I think you mean *counters*. Tokens are
permanents that aren't represented by cards, such as the creatures
generated by The Hive and Serpent Generator, to name a couple that were
around in your era.

At any rate, that doesn't make a difference either.

> Are those different than paying mana for the effect?

Nope. Anything that doesn't actually require tapping the creature can be
used while it's tapped.

> What about constant effect artifacts? If one of them is tapped does
> it's effect work or not?

Now, here we run into a rule that has out-and-out CHANGED since your
day. Back when you were originally playing, the answer would have been
no - tapped artifacts "turned off" and their abilities did nothing /
couldn't be played, in general. Now, however, that is no longer the
case; artifacts only turn off if they specifically say they do. For
example, Winter Orb, a card that was very important back when you were
originally playing, now specifically says it only works while it isn't
tapped, and so do old stalwart Howling Mine and a number of cards from
the recent Mirrodin block; but most other artifacts, old and new, don't.

Always go by a card's latest Oracle wording, by the way. Oracle is an
official WotC document that can be found at
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dci/oracle

> Someone please refresh my memory.

Well, in some cases, like the tapped artifact thing, we may need to do
more than that! But people here are always happy to answer these sorts
of questions.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 29, 2005 2:08:23 PM

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

Michael Beattie <mbeattie@alumni.rutgers.edu> wrote:

> Are those different than paying mana for the effect?

If you can pay the cost of an activated ability, you may play it,
regardless of whether a creature is tapped or not.
Of course, if a cost requires you to tap a creature and that creature is
already tapped, you may not tap it and as such you may not pay that cost
(which means you can't use the thing requiring you to pay that cost,
whether you were playing a spell or an activated ability).

> What about constant effect artifacts? If one of them is tapped does
> it's effect work or not?

Artifact used to be categorized (constant, mono...) but they aren't
anymore. If an artifact has an ability, it always works, whether the
artifact itself is tapped or not. Some cards may stop working when
tapped, but such a restriction is written out explicitely in the card's
ability:

Howling Mine
Artifact {2}
At the beginning of each player's draw step, if Howling Mine is
untapped, that player draws a card.

My advice for you is to get an Eight Edition (or Ninth when it comes out
in a few weeks) rules book and give it a read. Magic's rules have been
changed a lot since the Early Years ;) 

- ∞

--
I miei post non sbagliano. E' la realta' ad essere inesatta.
Anonymous
June 29, 2005 2:08:24 PM

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

l0ne <thethinker@email.it.is.not.invalid> wrote:
>My advice for you is to get an Eight Edition (or Ninth when it comes out
>in a few weeks) rules book and give it a read. Magic's rules have been
>changed a lot since the Early Years ;) 

One change he may not realize? It's no longer possible to 'get a rulebook'
by buying a starter deck; Fifth Edition was the last edition to have
actual rulebooks in the starter decks, and they've been available online
ONLY since Sixth Edition. Check

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=magic/rules/tourne...

to get a copy of the Comprehensive Rulebook - it will also be much drier than
the ones he remembers, without the long examples of play and the two named
people taking part in the examples...

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.
Anonymous
June 29, 2005 6:01:01 PM

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

It's me again.. I have another quick question based on attacking and
blocking rules...

If I attack and someone declares a blocker, and then I kill that
blocker with an instant what happens? Is the attacker unblocked? Is
it still blocked but give and receive 0 damage? if it's unblocked can
the defender declare another creature as a blocker?
Anonymous
June 29, 2005 8:03:33 PM

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

Jeff Heikkinen <no.way@jose.org> writes:
> What he would now have to get to get the simplified rulebook you're
> talking about is the "core game" or similar boxed-set type product

It's also available as the "Basic Rulebook" at the top of the "Casual
Player Rules" page at
<http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=magic/rules/casual...;

It's not the official rules at all, but it should get one started in
how the game ticks nowadays. And it's a little easier to start with
than the full comprehensive rules.

--
Peter C.
"Do not worry about your difficulties in Mathematics. I can assure you
mine are still greater."
-- Albert Einstein
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 1:43:12 AM

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

David DeLaney <dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com> wrote:

> 'get a rulebook'
> by buying a starter deck

Wait... what? Isn't there a simplifiedd rulebook in the starter? I
remember it very well -- the one with the green cover and the same art
as on the Eight Ed. box... I've read it once, too.
I'm in Italy, so this refers to the Italian edition of the starter
decks. Dunno if it's any different.

- ∞

--
I miei post non sbagliano. E' la realta' ad essere inesatta.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 2:37:57 AM

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

Peter Cooper Jr. <pete+mtg@cooperjr.name> wrote:

> It's not the official rules at all, but it should get one started in
> how the game ticks nowadays. And it's a little easier to start with
> than the full comprehensive rules.

Which is why I was recommending it as a starting point; it has very good
descriptions of concepts like the stack and whatnot. It shouldn't be
very hard to obtain one without having to buy the core game.
Thanks for clarifying the whole starter-core-game-tournament-pack mess
:)  I'm a post-6E only player myself.

- ∞

--
I miei post non sbagliano. E' la realta' ad essere inesatta.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 3:18:40 AM

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

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Michael Beattie wrote:

> It's me again.. I have another quick question based on attacking and
> blocking rules...
>
> If I attack and someone declares a blocker, and then I kill that
> blocker with an instant what happens?

(killed = detroyed?)
The blocker is put into its owners graveyard.

> Is the attacker unblocked?

No, a blocked creature stays blocked until the end of the combat
phase.

> Is it still blocked but give and receive 0 damage?

Yes, it won't be dealt any damage and unless it has trample it won't
be dealing any damage either. (Both unless there were other blockers
involved.)

> if it's unblocked can the defender declare another creature as a
> blocker?

No, all blockers are declared at the same time.

--
David
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 4:43:59 AM

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

One of the voices in my head - or was it Michael Beattie? - just
said...
> It's me again.. I have another quick question based on attacking and
> blocking rules...
>
> If I attack and someone declares a blocker, and then I kill that
> blocker with an instant what happens? Is the attacker unblocked? Is
> it still blocked but give and receive 0 damage? if it's unblocked can
> the defender declare another creature as a blocker?

It remains blocked, and thus, unless it has Trample, deals no damage to
the defending player. And no, the defending player can't declare more
blockers - he only had one chance to do that, and by the time your
question can arise, that chance has passed him by.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 10:42:07 AM

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

l0ne <thethinker@email.it.is.not.invalid> wrote:
>David DeLaney <dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com> wrote:
>
>> 'get a rulebook'
>> by buying a starter deck
>
>Wait... what? Isn't there a simplifiedd rulebook in the starter?

Okay, two-people-separated-by-common-language time.

A "starter deck" is what WotC, for years now, has called a "tournament deck".
Why the name change? Because it decided to bring out a product named "Starter"
without considering that that was what players everywhere called the
60-or-75-card little boxed random boosters.

The Basic set is what you're calling the "starter", the one that came with a
foil Rhox and a CD with tutorials and two 30-card(?) pre-arranged decks and,
yes, a simplified-to-the-point-of-actually-getting-some-things-wrong-
deliberately rulebook. Which can also be seen on the Magic webpages -
bottom left corner of the Magic page has links to the Comprehensive Rules,
what we usually call "the rulebook", and to "Rules for Casual Players" with
a link to the Basic Rulebook, the one you mention. The "Rules for New Players"
also has a link to that same Basic Rulebook.

>remember it very well -- the one with the green cover and the same art
>as on the Eight Ed. box... I've read it once, too.
>I'm in Italy, so this refers to the Italian edition of the starter
>decks. Dunno if it's any different.

Okay, not a "common language" problem then. "Starter decks" means something
different over here - either the actual old starter decks (which the original
asker will remember, the ones with the 2x3.5" rulebooks in them) or decks
made out of Starter-set cards somehow (but Starter has been out of print for
quite some time now, as has Portal).

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.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 10:51:03 AM

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

On 29 Jun 2005 14:01:01 -0700, Michael Beattie <mtbeedee@gmail.com> wrote:
>It's me again.. I have another quick question based on attacking and
>blocking rules...
>
>If I attack and someone declares a blocker, and then I kill that
>blocker with an instant what happens?

Combat phase continues, and you're now at least partway through
declare-blockers step. If you only attacked with one attacker, it's of course
still blocked, and defending player isn't going to take any damage unless the
attacker has Trample.

> Is the attacker unblocked?

No. Once an attacker becomes blocked, it STAYS blocked until the ATTACKER
leaves combat. Nothing "unblocks" an attacker except a spell from Alpha/Beta/
Unlimited named False Orders, and an enchantment from Legends named Imprison,
and both only because their Oracle wording says they do this.

>Is it still blocked but give and receive 0 damage?

It's still blocked. The damage part depends on WHEN you killed its only
blocker.

If this was during declare-blockers step, then combat damage is NOT yet on
the stack, and this attacker won't have anything to assign combat damage to
legally, and nothing will be there to assign combat damage to the attacker,
so no combat damage is going to go on the stack once combat-damage step starts.

If this was during combat-damage step, then combat damage is ALREADY ON the
stack. Since the blocker has left play, the damage FROM the attacker won't be
able to be dealt to it. Since the attacker's still in play, the damage from
the blocker WILL be able to be dealt to it, and will get dealt.

In other words, you're usually better off doing this, as attacking player,
before combat damage goes on the stack.

In either case, no damage will get dealt to defending player, because no
damage was -assigned- to defending player.

(The exception is if the attacker has Trample, or has the Rhox ability "You may
have this creature assign combat damage as though it were unblocked.". In the
Trample case, if the blocker was removed BEFORE combat damage step, then the
attacker will HAVE TO assign all its combat damage to defending player, because
now that's a legal place for it to assign combat damage to and it has to
assign it somewhere if it can. In the Rhox-like case, again if the blocker was
removed before combat damage step, the attacking player _may_ assign the combat
damage as though the attacker were unblocked, but is not forced to.)

>if it's unblocked can
>the defender declare another creature as a blocker?

No, we're long past that point in time. Blockers are only declared as declare-
blockers step begins, all at once; this isn't Yu-Gi-Oh or Versus, where you
declare one attack with one blocker, resolve that, declare another attack on
another creature, resolve that, etc. We're after that time, because you
waited for blockers to be declared then AFTER that destroyed a blocker with a
spell or ability.

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.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 12:15:03 PM

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

On 29 Jun 2005, Michael Beattie wrote:

>It's me again.. I have another quick question based on attacking and
>blocking rules...
>
>If I attack and someone declares a blocker, and then I kill that
>blocker with an instant what happens? Is the attacker unblocked? Is
>it still blocked but give and receive 0 damage? if it's unblocked can
>the defender declare another creature as a blocker?

Does assignment of blockers use the stack?

If it does, then once the blocking assignments are declared and on the
stack, but before they become effective, you could destroy a declared
blocker and prevent the attacker being blocked. (i.e. Place an effect
that would destroy a declared blocker on top of the stack, on top of the
blocking assignment. It will resolve first and the blocker won't block.)

If blocking assignments *don't* use the stack, then no, they cannot be
prevented from taking effect once announced. Only an effect that
explicitly unblocks an attacker would then be effective.

I'm sure somebody will quote the relevant rule about stack use... so watch
for it.

(I can't get to the rules on the Wizards site due to this lousy corporate
firewall. You'd think issues of such importance to geeks would have
exceptions!)

Gene P.
Slidell LA

--
Alcore Nilth - The Mad Alchemist of Gevbeck
alcore@uurth.com
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 1:14:59 PM

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

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Peter Cooper Jr. wrote:

[snip]
>Gene Pharr wrote:
>> (I can't get to the rules on the Wizards site due to this lousy corporate
>> firewall. You'd think issues of such importance to geeks would have
>> exceptions!)
>
>What kind of firewall doesn't allow access to web sites, but does
>allow access to *newsgroups*? Surely the latter is a more
>work-time-consuming activity (particularly once the web access is
>taken away :) .

Our firewall content filters to decide whether to allow or block access to
material online. (Curse Wizards for including "games" in it's keyword
list!).

It also allows outbound telnet and ftp to approved destination
addresses... I managed to get my home server approved "for support
reasons". So, though I'm at work, I have full remote access to my unix
shell account at home. And there really is no better environment for the
support of netnews than unix/linux.

PINE Rules!

Gene P.

--
Alcore Nilth - The Mad Alchemist of Gevbeck
alcore@uurth.com
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 1:30:44 PM

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

"Gene P." <alcore@uurth.com> writes:
> Does assignment of blockers use the stack?

No. It's just a special thing that happens at the beginning of the
Declare Blockers step, after which players get priority to play
things.

> If blocking assignments *don't* use the stack, then no, they cannot be
> prevented from taking effect once announced. Only an effect that
> explicitly unblocks an attacker would then be effective.

Right... I'm not aware of any offhand, although it wouldn't surprise
me if one existed somewhere. More often, something explicitly removes
something from combat, which then makes the attacker no longer
attacking or blocked.

> I'm sure somebody will quote the relevant rule about stack use... so watch
> for it.

See rule 309 in the Comprehensive Rules.

> (I can't get to the rules on the Wizards site due to this lousy corporate
> firewall. You'd think issues of such importance to geeks would have
> exceptions!)

What kind of firewall doesn't allow access to web sites, but does
allow access to *newsgroups*? Surely the latter is a more
work-time-consuming activity (particularly once the web access is
taken away :) .

--
Peter C.
"General Use Only"
-- Restriction on bulletin board at Worcester State College
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 1:49:07 PM

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

Michael Beattie <mtbeedee@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is the attacker unblocked?

Once a creature is blocked, it remains blocked until end of combat.
Blocked creatures assign their combat damage to blockers only, unless
they have trample. If a blocked creature has no blockers (because they
have all left play or because it's been blocked by a spell or ability
rather than by a blocking creature), it won't assign damage to any
creature or player, unless it has trample.

- ∞

--
I miei post non sbagliano. E' la realta' ad essere inesatta.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 1:49:08 PM

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

l0ne <thethinker@email.it.is.not.invalid> wrote:
>Michael Beattie <mtbeedee@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Is the attacker unblocked?
>
>Once a creature is blocked, it remains blocked until end of combat.

Nitpick: "until it leaves combat". Combat phase ending can do that ... but
so can it changing controllers, it being destroyed or otherwise leaving play,
it stopping being a creature, anything that SAYS it is removed from combat,
or _using_ (not creating) a regeneration shield to prevent it from being
destroyed.

>Blocked creatures assign their combat damage to blockers only, unless
>they have trample. If a blocked creature has no blockers (because they
>have all left play or because it's been blocked by a spell or ability
>rather than by a blocking creature), it won't assign damage to any
>creature or player, unless it has trample.

Good summary.

Note that it also depends on WHEN he destroyed the blocker; if it was later,
in response to the combat damage, then the damage FROM the blocker TO the
attacking creature still gets dealt when combat damage resolves.

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.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 7:11:25 PM

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

Gene P. (58.116% quality rating):
>
> It also allows outbound telnet and ftp to approved destination
> addresses... I managed to get my home server approved "for support
> reasons". So, though I'm at work, I have full remote access to my unix
> shell account at home.

Oh man, I sure hope you're not really using plaintext telnet or ftp to
remotely connect to your home server. You need to be using ssh.

And if you do get an allowance to use ssh (or heck, just start running
ssh on the telnet port), then you can set up ssh tunneling from your
work computer to access any sites you want via your home connection.

/joe
--
One third of American women agree that baseball was more exciting when
it was on strike.
Anonymous
June 30, 2005 10:21:19 PM

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

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, phat_joe wrote:

> Gene P. (58.116% quality rating):
>>
>> It also allows outbound telnet and ftp to approved destination
>> addresses... I managed to get my home server approved "for support
>> reasons". So, though I'm at work, I have full remote access to my unix
>> shell account at home.
>
> Oh man, I sure hope you're not really using plaintext telnet or ftp to
> remotely connect to your home server. You need to be using ssh.
>
> And if you do get an allowance to use ssh (or heck, just start running
> ssh on the telnet port), then you can set up ssh tunneling from your
> work computer to access any sites you want via your home connection.

Or you could just use a text-based browser (like links or lynx) over
your telnet connection.

--
David
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 2:45:56 AM

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

David DeLaney <dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com> wrote:

> a CD with tutorials

The US version has a CD with tutorials?
*looks at Italian core game* *sighs*

Sorry for the whole language mess - the only Magic jargon I know is the
Italian one, so I have to guess when I'm writing English. I had no idea
of the whole tournament deck-starter-core game mess, being a relatively
recent and native-language-oblivious player.

- ∞

--
I miei post non sbagliano. E' la realta' ad essere inesatta.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 2:55:13 AM

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

l0ne <thethinker@email.it.is.not.invalid> wrote:
>David DeLaney <dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com> wrote:
>> a CD with tutorials
>
>The US version has a CD with tutorials?

I think it does, or I may be remembering the 7E version or some such.

>*looks at Italian core game* *sighs*
>
>Sorry for the whole language mess - the only Magic jargon I know is the
>Italian one, so I have to guess when I'm writing English. I had no idea
>of the whole tournament deck-starter-core game mess, being a relatively
>recent and native-language-oblivious player.

No problem; history lessons are, by now, irreversibly part of some
explanations...

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.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 2:56:48 AM

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

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 08:15:03 -0500, Gene P. <alcore@uurth.com> wrote:
>On 29 Jun 2005, Michael Beattie wrote:
>>It's me again.. I have another quick question based on attacking and
>>blocking rules...
>>
>>If I attack and someone declares a blocker, and then I kill that
>>blocker with an instant what happens? Is the attacker unblocked? Is
>>it still blocked but give and receive 0 damage? if it's unblocked can
>>the defender declare another creature as a blocker?
>
>Does assignment of blockers use the stack?

No.

Things that use the stack:

spells
activated nonmana abilities
triggered nonmana abilities
combat damage assignments

Nothing else does, and nothing else can be responded to.

>If blocking assignments *don't* use the stack, then no, they cannot be
>prevented from taking effect once announced. Only an effect that
>explicitly unblocks an attacker would then be effective.

This is correct. And as far as I can see at the moment there are only two
such effects, both from 1994 or earlier.

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.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 2:57:50 AM

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

Gene P. <alcore@uurth.com> wrote:
>It also allows outbound telnet and ftp to approved destination
>addresses... I managed to get my home server approved "for support
>reasons". So, though I'm at work, I have full remote access to my unix
>shell account at home. And there really is no better environment for the
>support of netnews than unix/linux.

One word: lynx. (You want the text version of the rulebook and/or Oracle
anyway, no? Yes?)

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.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 8:55:50 AM

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

I have yet another question that I can't remember the answer to.

Can you use the ability of a creature that is tapped if that ability
doesnt require tapping? IIRC, you can use it if it is like "sacrifice
this creature" or "tap other creatures to do something to this creature"
but not if it requires spending mana.

Is that correct?
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 12:07:52 PM

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

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, David de Kloet wrote:

[snip]
>Or you could just use a text-based browser (like links or lynx) over
>your telnet connection.
[snip]

I use the text-only browsers frequentlty... But *you* try to navigate
Wizards.com with a text only browser that doesn't know javascript!

Ick.

Alcore

--
Alcore Nilth - The Mad Alchemist of Gevbeck
alcore@uurth.com
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 12:14:22 PM

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

On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Michael Beattie wrote:

>I have yet another question that I can't remember the answer to.
>
>Can you use the ability of a creature that is tapped if that ability
>doesnt require tapping? IIRC, you can use it if it is like "sacrifice
>this creature" or "tap other creatures to do something to this creature"
>but not if it requires spending mana.
>
>Is that correct?

You can *always* use *any* ability of a creature that you can pay the
costs for.

In this case Tap is just a cost.

You can tap a creature to pay a cost any time you have controlled it since
the beginning of your turn... provided that it is not already tapped.

This is distinct from and effect that forces something else to tap as part
of it's action. (i.e. Tap isn't a cost, it's an effect.) In this case
you can tap anything... It's just that if it's already tapped that will
produce "No Visible Effect".

One last time: If you can pay a cost, you can do it.

Gene P.

--
Alcore Nilth - The Mad Alchemist of Gevbeck
alcore@uurth.com
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 4:54:37 PM

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

Michael Beattie <mbeattie@alumni.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>I have yet another question that I can't remember the answer to.
>
>Can you use the ability of a creature that is tapped if that ability
>doesnt require tapping? IIRC, you can use it if it is like "sacrifice
>this creature" or "tap other creatures to do something to this creature"
>but not if it requires spending mana.

You can. You can't pay an activation cost that includes "Tap" unless the
creature is untapped. But there's no such restriction on paying other
kinds of costs - you do have to have whatever material IS required, but
"Sacrifice <this>: Do Foo" doesn't say anything about having to tap it, or
anything about whether it must be tapped or untapped, so it doesn't -care-.
In particular, for the last bit of your question, "pay this much mana"
doesn't care whether the creature that the ability is on is tapped or not.

>Is that correct?

No - you can use the ability as long as its cost doesn't require tapping
the creature. Not "as long as its cost doesn't require tapping the creature
and doesn't involve paying mana".

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.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 4:59:24 PM

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

Gene P. <alcore@uurth.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Michael Beattie wrote:
>>Can you use the ability of a creature that is tapped if that ability
>>doesnt require tapping? IIRC, you can use it if it is like "sacrifice
>>this creature" or "tap other creatures to do something to this creature"
>>but not if it requires spending mana.
>>
>>Is that correct?
>
>You can *always* use *any* ability of a creature that you can pay the
>costs for.

Er. Unless, of course, there's a tap-symbol in the cost AND you haven't
controlled the creature continuously since your latest turn started. (In
much older terms, "sick" creatures can't use tap-cost activated abilities,
just like they can't attack. They can still do anything else. But "You
can ALWAYS use ANY ability of a creature you can pay for" isn't true.)

>You can tap a creature to pay a cost any time you have controlled it since
>the beginning of your turn... provided that it is not already tapped.

More precisely, you can use an activated ability the creature has that has
the Tap-symbol in the cost if the above is true. If the ability isn't
activated, or doesn't have the Tap symbol in its activation cost, then
the game doesn't care how long you've controlled the creature.

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.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 5:40:39 PM

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

Michael Beattie <mbeattie@alumni.rutgers.edu> wrote:

> IIRC, you can use it if it is like "sacrifice
> this creature" or "tap other creatures to do something to this creature"
> but not if it requires spending mana.

Er... maybe I'm mistaken, but didn't you ask this already?
When you pay a cost, you can do _anything_ while the creature is tapped
that does not require tapping it (which you cannot do, the creature
being _already_ tapped).
You can spend mana, sacrifice the creature or have it do a silly dance
on the tabletop if the card so requires as a cost to an activated
ability. The only thing is, if it's tapped, you can't use an ability
that requires you to tap it (since you can't).

- ∞
--
I miei post non sbagliano. E' la realta' ad essere inesatta.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 5:40:40 PM

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

l0ne wrote:
> Michael Beattie <mbeattie@alumni.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>
>
>>IIRC, you can use it if it is like "sacrifice
>>this creature" or "tap other creatures to do something to this creature"
>>but not if it requires spending mana.
>
>
> Er... maybe I'm mistaken, but didn't you ask this already?
> When you pay a cost, you can do _anything_ while the creature is tapped
> that does not require tapping it (which you cannot do, the creature
> being _already_ tapped).
> You can spend mana, sacrifice the creature or have it do a silly dance
> on the tabletop if the card so requires as a cost to an activated
> ability. The only thing is, if it's tapped, you can't use an ability
> that requires you to tap it (since you can't).
>
> - ∞

Yea, I guess I did... I thought there was a difference but upon reading
it again I dont see what it was and I dont remember the situation that
made me question it.

Sorry 'bout that.
Anonymous
July 1, 2005 10:54:09 PM

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

On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Gene P. wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, David de Kloet wrote:
>
> [snip]
>> Or you could just use a text-based browser (like links or lynx) over
>> your telnet connection.
> [snip]
>
> I use the text-only browsers frequentlty... But *you* try to navigate
> Wizards.com with a text only browser that doesn't know javascript!

I just used links to browse magicthegathering.com and had no problem
getting the comprehensive rules. I believe it knows javascript but why
should I use a text browser that doesn't know javascript?

--
David
!