MTG Cardsmith Community Forums
Templating, Interactions, and other Rules
I noticed that we don't have a thread for discussing proper templating of abilities, or any type rules or design question.
(We have a card design feedback section, but not a general thread in common territory for questions divorced from specific cards; Maringam has created such a thread for submissions of existing custom cards, but none exist between all members of the community.)
The location of this thread is a bit awkward, but it seemed the closest given one of its components below.
I want this to be an open area that we 'Smiths can use to ask questions of each other about aspects of the rules that we may be unsure of. This can be generally, or for feedback on mechanics that we may be attempting to generate before they appear on cards. Not sure if that keyword you've got an idea for totally checks out with the comp rules? Ask here.
Additionally, we don't yet have a place for brain-teaser type activities (and this is where the Challenge part comes in).
If you come across, dream up, or invent some game-state for which you are unsure of the correct resolution, you can ask about it here.
Alternatively, think up a puzzle for the rest of us to figure out!
E.g.
Puzzle Game-state:
Player A controls a Grizzly Bears.
Player B casts Lightning bolt, targeting Grizzly Bears.
Player A responds with Giant Growth, targeting Grizzly Bears.
What happens? Does Grizzly Bears live or die, and what state is it in following the resolution of all spells and abilities on the stack and after all relevant state-based actions have been applied?
Answer:
Giant Growth resolves first, granting +3/+3 to the Grizzly Bears (it is now a 5/5).
Lightning Bolt resolves, dealing 3 damage to Grizzly Bears.
Grizzly Bears is now a 5/5 creature with 3 damage marked on it.
Verdict:
Grizzly Bears lives!
Perhaps the multiple components of this thread should be split into two separate threads, one for general rules / design questions, and one for game-state questions or game-states intended as puzzles.
Does this concept seem interesting to any of you?
(We have a card design feedback section, but not a general thread in common territory for questions divorced from specific cards; Maringam has created such a thread for submissions of existing custom cards, but none exist between all members of the community.)
The location of this thread is a bit awkward, but it seemed the closest given one of its components below.
I want this to be an open area that we 'Smiths can use to ask questions of each other about aspects of the rules that we may be unsure of. This can be generally, or for feedback on mechanics that we may be attempting to generate before they appear on cards. Not sure if that keyword you've got an idea for totally checks out with the comp rules? Ask here.
Additionally, we don't yet have a place for brain-teaser type activities (and this is where the Challenge part comes in).
If you come across, dream up, or invent some game-state for which you are unsure of the correct resolution, you can ask about it here.
Alternatively, think up a puzzle for the rest of us to figure out!
E.g.
Puzzle Game-state:
Player A controls a Grizzly Bears.
Player B casts Lightning bolt, targeting Grizzly Bears.
Player A responds with Giant Growth, targeting Grizzly Bears.
What happens? Does Grizzly Bears live or die, and what state is it in following the resolution of all spells and abilities on the stack and after all relevant state-based actions have been applied?
Answer:
Giant Growth resolves first, granting +3/+3 to the Grizzly Bears (it is now a 5/5).
Lightning Bolt resolves, dealing 3 damage to Grizzly Bears.
Grizzly Bears is now a 5/5 creature with 3 damage marked on it.
Verdict:
Grizzly Bears lives!
Perhaps the multiple components of this thread should be split into two separate threads, one for general rules / design questions, and one for game-state questions or game-states intended as puzzles.
Does this concept seem interesting to any of you?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Geralf's Messenger is on the battlefield. It's Undying has previously triggered, so it has a +1/+1 counter on it. (It is a 4/3 black Zombie creature)
A player casts Black Sun's Zenith, where X is 3.
The game state is allowed by all players to resolve to completion.
Will Geralf's Messenger resurrect itself, and why or why not?
Although the two cancel each other out as a state based action, GM is still treated as having a +1/+1 counter and three -1/-1 counters on it, so undying does not trigger.
(From the CR.)
121.3. If a permanent has both a +1/+1 counter and a -1/-1 counter on it, N +1/+1 and N -1/-1 counters are removed from it as a state-based action, where N is the smaller of the number of +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters on it.
@Damnation
As I understand it, all state-based actions are performed at once. Also, no player controls them (704.2) and therefore no one would be able to choose an order for them. You referenced (603.3) which refers to triggered abilities.
The GM will be sent to the graveyard for having 0 toughness (704.5f), and the +1/+1 counters will annihilate each other (704.5r). This will happen "simultaneously as a single event".
Then "all triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are put on the stack".
(704.3)
The game sees a 0-toughness GM with a +1/+1 counter on it, and three -1/-1 counters on it.
Then the game sees the GM in the graveyard.
Undying's trigger asks a question: "Was there a +1/+1 counter on the creature when it died?". And in this case, the answer is yes. That means Undying's 'if' clause returns false and the GM will not resurrect.
If state based actions happen at once, would the counters not negate themselves at the same time the 0 toughness check happens? Why would the zero toughness take precedence over the counters?
Neither state-based action is 'taking precedence'. They do both happen at once. The GM is moving to the Graveyard in the exact same instant that the counters are cancelling. Then Undying triggers once all SBA's have gone through because the last known state of the Geralf's Messenger on the battlefield was that it had at least one +1/+1 counter on it. It was never on the battlefield without one.
@All
Are rules brainteasers a thing that people are interested in?
I understand Mark Rosewater has a book (Magic: The Puzzling) full of them.
I think it might be best to split this thread in two, placing the templating section in the Card Design forum and the Brainteaser section in the Gameplay forum. Seem right?
If they happen at the exact same time, the counter is removed at the exact same time it registers that it has zero toughness though, so it would hit the graveyard without a counter, would it not? If it registers that it dies due to the SBA of zero toughness, then the counter is removed at that time as well, triggering the Undying mechanic after the counter is removed. I don't see how it keeps the knowledge that it had a +1/+1 counter when it was last on the battlefield, if both zero toughness and counters negated happen at once. It can't move from the battlefield to the graveyard without the counters removing as well. I assume you're saying that in a space between the card being on the battlefield, and the card triggering Undying is when the counters dissipate, leaving an echo of 'when undying checks itself, the last known living copy of this card was one +1/+1 and three -1/-1 counters'. To me, it would check and see that it died with 2 -1/-1 counters, not all of them.
I am not a judge, so I don't know how Wizards official rules it, and I assume you are right, ya wouldn't argue a point without good cause. I on the other hand will argue a losing battle 'til I am blue in the face if I think the rule is illogical, and in this case, I do. At this point anyways.
I think the brainteasers are a cool idea. Don't really know how well stuff like that works when you can just Google whatever you want, but personally I believe in the honour system, and assume most on this site do. I just wonder how you can make it work without a reply spoiling the question if someone reads it, or notices it prior to their own thinking. Almost need to send whomever posts the brainteaser a private message with the answer, which then detracts from the community involvement since you wouldn't see people trying to figure it out on here, working together, boros style to try and crush the conundrum.
Edit: I just googled the problem, and there is an example presented in the Comp rules
Direct Quote:
"704.7. If a state-based action results in a permanent leaving the battlefield at the same time other state-based actions were performed, that permanents last known information is derived from the game state before any of those state-based actions were performed.Example: You control Young Wolf, a 1/1 creature with undying, and it has a +1/+1 counter on it. A spell puts three -1/-1 counters on Young Wolf. Before state-based actions are performed, Young Wolf has one +1/+1 counter and three -1/-1 counters on it. After state-based actions are performed, Young Wolf is in the graveyard. When it was last on the battlefield, it had a +1/+1 counter on it, so undying will not trigger."
-------------------------------------------------------------
(Adding a card to change the outcome)
Now, if there was also a Diregraf Captain on the field to start, then SBA's would cancel the counters and also kill the Captain for having 0 toughness, and then would check again, finding that the Messenger now has 0 toughness and killing it as well. In this case, the counters canceled before Messenger died, so Undying does trigger.
--------------------------------------------------------------
(Further step-by-step walk-through from me of initial problem)
It's not that the counters cancel at the same time as 0 toughness registers.
It's that the counters register at the same time that the 0 toughness _registers_ and then resolves at the same time that it resolves too.
Both of them register at the same time, and then both of them happen at the same time.
Re-iterating: The creature is on the battlefield with one +counter and three -counters. Then the creature is in the graveyard. Those are the two game-states that exist right after one another, before and after SBA's are checked and resolved.
_After that_, Undying sees that its creature has died (been put from the battlefield into the graveyard), and checks to see whether its trigger condition is true. To do so, it looks at the last known information about the game object that was its creature on the (battlefield) and sees that it did have a +1 counter on it, so the condition returns false and Undying does not trigger.
As far as ethos goes, I found the problem a long time ago somewhere on the internet, and some people claiming to be level 1 judges answered it.
To make sure, I went to my local FNM and the judges there (I think level 1?) supported the ruling (this was closer to that time). Next time I'm there, I'll ask again to make sure I'm not misremembering.
----------------
The puzzles can be worked out in public; people's thoughts don't have to be kept hidden, and whoever poses the question can answer it either after a while or once there have been some responses. And if people look it up, then they're still learning the relevant rules, which is the goal of the exercise. Everyone should just try to think through it on their own before scrolling down for the replies or checking resources (other than the comprehensive rules) so that they get the critical thinking and rules application practice, rather than just memorizing a specific interaction.
I get it, disagree, but accept it. I find my mind at odds with most of Magic's rulings. But, their game. Ha ha.
Thanks. I do appreciate the extended analysis, and examples.
I say we try it. No reason not to try some trivia related, or rule related information flowing onto the forums.
I nominate you as Trivia Master to the Cards.
A more humorous title could be along the lines of "Curator of Text-Walls" or "Rules Lawyer" ;D
But if you like you can be the Fiduciary of Rules. But we may need to think of a shorter version of "Fiduciary"... maybe dropping a couple of letters...?
XD