About
Riccardo Tessitori
Riccardo Tessitori
Riccardo
Tessitori is a level 5 judge from Italy (and former Pro Player ^__^); he judged a hundred professional events, headjudged 15 Grand Prix events in Europe, the United States and Asia and has been headjudging Pro Tours and World Championships since 2009:
- Pro
Tour Kyoto 2009
- Pro Tour Austin 2009
- Worlds Chiba 2010
- Pro Tour Philadelphia 2011
- Pro Tour Barcelona 2012
- World Magic Cup Indianapolis 2012
Lotus Cobra, and How We Spoke When We Were Young
Hello everybody!
2013 has started, are you ready for a new year full of wonderful Magic?
We finished 2012 with quite a long article about tournament policy,
and we will start the New Year with the “opposite” topic: rules, hard Magic
rules.
First, let’s warm up with our always present five questions of the week,
and then let’s discover the Top5 of the weird obsolete expressions and the
first Card of the Month in 2013: Lotus Cobra.
Happy reading.
Questions of the Week
Q: If I cast an Ornithopter (which costs zero mana) and I use a Cavern of Souls to pay the additional cost due to a Sphere of Resistance or a Trinisphere, will my Ornithopter be counterable or not?
A: It will be uncounterable. The effect of Cavern of Souls applies if
the mana is used to cast the spell, whether to pay for the mana cost or for any
additional costs.
Q: I attack with Geist of Saint Traft, I put the Angel token on the
battlefield, and then I use Ninjutsu to return my Geist to my hand. Will I get
to keep the token?
A: No. The effect “exile it at the end of combat” is created by the
triggered ability that creates the token; this ability is not linked to the
Geist, and the token will be removed independently from what happens to the
Geist.
Q: I control Martyr of Sands and Ajani's Pridemate; if I use the
Martyr’s ability and I reveal four white cards, how many +1/+1 counters will I
put on my Pridemate? One, four, twelve?
A: Just one. Ajani's Pridemate has an ability that triggers every time
you gain life; Martyr of Sands has an ability that allows you to gain life
once; the amount depends on the number of white cards you reveal, but the gain
of life is a single effect.
Q: Can I use Sundial of the Infinite to save my Ball Lightning?
A: Well… Yes… but it will die at the end of your opponent’s turn,
because his ability triggers at the beginning of each end step.
Q: I control three Phantasmal Bears, and my opponent casts Echoing Decay; will he kill all my bears?
A: No, just one. The targeted Phantasmal Bear will be sacrificed before Echoing Decay resolves; when Echoing Decay tries to resolve, it will be
countered because its target won’t be on the battlefield; the other two Phantasmal Bears were never targeted, and they will survive.
Damage on the Stack – Top 5 Obsolete Sentences
About a year ago, we
talked about a few obsolete terms; today, we will take a look at a few obsolete
expressions. Fasten your time-travelling seat belts and, especially if you have
been playing Magic for many years, enjoy our trip into the Stone Age of Magic!
5) “You may play cards as though they were in your hand”
In the beginning: In
modern times, with abilities like flashback, dredge and unearth, the idea of
playing with the graveyard (or against our opponent’s graveyard) is part of the
DNA of any player.
In the first days of Magic, the idea of getting cards back from the
graveyard and add them to our hand was quite common (for example Regrowth and Raise Dead), but it was next to impossible to actually cast cards from the
graveyard; only cards in your hand could be cast!
Very few cards allowed the rare exception and, to avoid
misunderstanding, they said we could cast the cards “as though there were in
your hand”.
A few questions come to mind immediately:
OK, it’s like these cards are in my hand; can I discard them to Wild Mongrel? Can I cycle them?
No and no, saying that “we can cast them as though they are in our hand”
is very different from “they are in our hand”; the cards are still in the
graveyard; when we decide to cast them they move from the graveyard to the
stack; there is no moment when they are in our hand.
So, why mention the hand at all?!?
Good question, and here is the answer:
Today: …Wizards
of the Coast decided to remove that part of the sentence. How these cards work
hasn’t changed; it has become clearer.
4) “Can block as though it had Flying”
In the beginning:
similarly to several Magic cards that have been reprinted since the first
versions, Giant Spider was born with a rules text far from precise, and has
been reworded a few times.
With Sixth Edition, it got a quite official text that didn’t change
until Tenth Edition: “Giant Spider can block as though it had flying”.
A short and clear text, which shouldn’t cause misunderstandings, right?
OK, can Giant Spider block Elven Riders, which can be blocked only by
creatures with flying?
Well, the Spider hasn’t flying, so it shouldn’t be allowed to block; but
blocks like it had flying, so it should be allowed to block; well, for a long
time, Giant Spider was allowed to block Elven Riders.
Today: With
Future Sight, just before Tenth Edition, a new ability (Reach) was created.
Since then, the rules say that “creatures with flying can be blocked by
creatures with flying or reach”.
Our Giant Spider doesn’t have “blocks as though it has flying” anymore,
but has “Reach” instead.
It cannot block Elven Riders.
3) “Does not deal or receive combat damage”
In the beginning: Let’s
take a look at the original text of Fog Bank.
It doesn’t deal any combat damage; OK, its power is zero, this was
clear.
It doesn’t receive any combat damage. OK, whatever is the attacking
creature it blocks, it doesn’t receive any damage and it doesn’t die; it looks
simple again.
Let’s imagine now that the attacking creature has trample; can a 5/5
creature with trample deal damage to the defending player?
Answer A: Yes, it deals three damage. Even though Fog Bank doesn’t
receive any damage, we should assign to it at least damage equal to its
toughness; the remaining three can be assigned to the defending player.
Answer B: No. Fog Bank cannot receive damage, therefore any amount will
never be considered lethal; Fog Bank absorbs all damage.
Answer C: Yes, it deals five damage. Because Fog Bank cannot receive any
damage, we cannot assign any damage to it.
Damn, all these three answers might make sense!
Today: The
ambiguity has been removed by modifying the Oracle text of Fog Bank; it now
says that all combat damage is prevented.
It works exactly like with creatures with protection: if Fog Bank blocks
a creature with trample, the attacking player can assign to the wall just an
amount of damage equal to its toughness, and the rest to the defending player.
The correct answer is A: three damage.
2) “When you successfully cast”
In the beginning: When Skittering Skirge was initially printed, there were Interrupts.
The topic is vast; let’s just say that, any time a spell was cast, there
was a window where we could respond with interrupts (all counterspells were
interrupts); once this window closed, there was a window where we could cast
instants and no more interrupts. At that time, responding to our opponent’s
spell with Brainstorm (an instant) and then cast a Counterspell was not doable.
The original text of Skittering Skirge speaks about a creature spell
“successfully cast”, which meant “still on the stack after the window for
interrupts closed”; if the creature spell was countered, it wasn’t
“successfully cast” and Skittering Skirge wasn’t sacrificed.
Today: With
Sixth Edition, interrupts didn’t exist anymore, and the abilities like the one
from the Skittering Skirge trigger when the creature spell becomes cast; it
doesn’t matter if the creature spell resolves or is countered; the Skirge will
be sacrificed in any case.
1) “at end of turn”
In the beginning: I
believe it happened to many of us to play with a person that had just started
playing Magic, and we had to explain the following:
Him: “your turn”
Us: “at the end of your turn, I create a token with Rakdos Guildmage, I
untap and I attack with the Goblin”
Him: “But… the Goblin doesn’t die at the end of my turn?”
Us: “No, because blah blah”
Him: “OK, so if I cast Giant Growth at the end of your turn, my creature
is still bigger in my turn, right?”
Us: “No, because at the end of turn is different from until the end of
turn”
Saying that an ability triggered “at the end of turn” meant that the ability
triggered just before the real end of the turn; exactly, it triggered at the
beginning of the end step, which is a step where players receive priority.
Because we could make actions in that step, we could activate an ability
that would have created a delayed triggered ability in the following end of
turn step.
This way of playing wasn’t too complicated; it just needed to be
explained, and it needed some minutes to be accepted.
Today: With
M10, the “end of turn step” became the “end step”; the abilities that triggered
“at the end of turn” now trigger “at the beginning of the end step”.
The new wording, in addition to being more precise, is also much more
similar to “at the beginning of your upkeep”, which is much more known to all
the Magic players.
Card of the Month – Lotus Cobra
The Modern season has just begun and it looks like the format is very
healthy, with a lot of competitive archetypes; we have many possible deck
choices!
It’s also true that a few decks are, at the moment, slightly stronger
than the others; Jund, as it often happens, is one of the decks to beat… or to
play… or to play with an anti-Jund version of Jund:
Deathrite Shaman and Lotus Cobra, powered by fetchlands are a great mana
boost, which creates a significant advantage both in the mirror match and also
against combo decks.
From the rules point of view, Lotus Cobra’s ability is apparently
simple, but it can easily create misunderstanding; let’s see why.
Lotus
Cobra’s ability is not a mana ability
“A triggered ability without a target that triggers from activating a
mana ability and could put mana into a player’s mana pool when it resolves
is a mana ability.” [CR605.1b]
Lotus Cobra’s ability triggers any time a land enters the battlefield
under our control, not when we activate an activated mana ability. As a
consequence, Lotus Cobra’s triggered ability doesn’t meet the definition of
triggered mana ability.
A similar case is with Deathrite Shaman, whose ability that produces mana
is not a mana ability because it has a target.
These are a few consequences:
- The ability uses the stack, it can be responded to, and it can be
countered by spells like Stifle.
- The color of the mana is chosen on resolution; if you declare it when
the ability is put on the stack and your opponent doesn’t respond, you won’t be
able to change it on resolution; if you declare it when the ability is put on
the stack and your opponent makes an action in response, you will have the
choice of changing it on resolution.
- Asking your opponent “What color?” is equivalent to allowing the
ability to resolve.
Lotus
Cobra’s ability has to be announced
According to the current policy about missed triggers, any time one of
our triggered abilities should resolve, we have to announce it or somehow
demonstrate that we are aware of its existence, otherwise the ability has no
effect.
What does “demonstrate awareness” mean, in practice?
- We play a land and we say “Cobra gives me one mana.
- We play a land and we point at the Cobra.
- We play our third land and we immediately cast a four mana spell (that
we couldn’t cast unless the Cobra gave us the extra mana).
The
ability uses the stack, but playing a land doesn’t
Lotus Cobra’s ability, just like all the triggered abilities associated
to landfall, is a normal triggered ability: it triggers and is put on the
stack. The trigger event, on the contrary, is a special action that doesn’t use
the stack and nobody can respond to it.
If we ask to a judge “my opponent is playing a land, can I respond?”,
the correct answer would be “no”, because we cannot respond to the action of
playing a land, which is what we asked.
If we ask to a judge “my opponent is playing a land, can I respond to
the Cobra?”, the correct answer will be “yes”.
As always, it’s important to ask a precise and appropriate question.
I hope you enjoyed this article, and I’m looking forward to reading your
comments.
Don’t forget to submit all
your rules questions for the next installment of Ask the Judge:
You have the unique opportunity to ask Level 5
judge Riccardo Tessitori all the questions you want to!
You can ask him questions concerning rules
problems, the life of a level 5 judge, DCI policies, interesting tournament
situations and anything else you want to ask him!
Bidding is now closed.
Current Bids
Buyin expires on Fri, 25 Jan
See you in a few weeks!
Riccardo
Email this page
“A triggered ability without a target that triggers from activating a mana ability and could put mana into a player’s mana pool when it resolves is a mana ability.”
Im curious, what examples of triggered abilities without targets are there that are considered mana abilities only because of above mentioned rule ?
@Anon: Fertile Ground, Wild Growth, Mirari's Wake,
Only lands should be able to add mana to pools "IMMEDIATELY" as the CR say.
Fertile Ground, Wild Growth and Mirari's Wake; says that "you" or "controller" add mana to the pool. The player doesnt only command his cards, tokens and other pieces belonging to the game like the life pad (of which not only he is responsible(except triggers), but the opponent too, stupid rule btw, only controller should be responsible for own stuff), he also actually conjures mana ! =)=)=)
Llanowar Elves has a (mana) ability that adds mana to pool. And so does some artifacts and probably enchantments too. Probably even more types of cards that does this.
Its ok that many many types of cards can add mana to the pool, but lands are special in this case. Only lands should be able to do it "immediately". And if a card like Wild Growth had said "whenever enchanted land is tapped for mana it produces G in addition" then that would not break with what Ive said because of the word "IT" in my Wild Growth wording. Llanowar Elves should use the stack for producing mana, like Lotus Cobra does today. Activated ability or not is of less (if any) meaning in my eyes.
The first things one learns when starting MtG is that there are lands and spells, yeah.
Now, artifacts, that by nature are available to all kinds of decks (colorless mana to cast), could/should produce mana at sorcery speed (if the artifact in mind at all has an ability that can produce mana).
Voila, now we have mana at three different speeds where each speed contributes in giving identity to the card-category it belongs to. This is imo "making magic" in a better way. What we have today is a "mesh-together-ness" that makes MtG look like cake, pudding, cream, jelly and coffee stirred together in a blender and then served; that is a less delicious way, also to the eye (visually). Identity is reduced/lost.
One other thing; "whenever enchanted land is tapped for mana....". The word "whenever" suggests something static to me. Now think of Volatile Rig from the rtr set;
"Whenever Volatile Rig is dealt damage, flip a coin. If you lose the flip, sacrifice Volatile Rig."
and,
"When Volatile Rig dies, flip a coin....".(suggests something inevitable, which is false).
It should be "WHEN Volatile Rig is dealt damage..." and "IF Volatile Rig dies...". (And it could even be "if" in both cases.)
I dont particularly like how WotC uses language (almost in general), and I see this in so many things; cards, rules documents, articles on the mothership, and more. They appear deceitful to me oftentimes/sometimes (though this is more related to other stuff they do as a company).
Though I still have fun with MtG ! it is annoying to think of all the improvements that the game could have had. Instead of meshing together stuff which is a tendency, they could develop the basic ideas the game has always had much further to enrich the game and make it more flavorful/enjoyable (mana at three different speeds is just one of a gazillion possibilties), whilst AT THE SAME TIME avoid ACROBATIC sentences in the CR like "A triggered ability without a target that triggers from activating a mana ability and could put mana into a player’s mana pool when it resolves is a mana ability".
To anon above: if you say that tapping elves should work as with a normal ability, then anybody using a non-land thing to add mana effectively losses priority whenever they cast something, since they have to wait for their mana to arrive before casting. It also means that the order in which spells are cast has to change, since currently you don't have to use mana abilities until after you've announced a spell. So that would be a major rules revamp.
Also: using your cake-butter-jelley analogy: there obviously has to be a distinction between normal fast effects, and using lands to add mana. While you're quite right to say that you'd prefer it if that line was drawn somewhere else (i.e. putting Llanowar elves on the side of current non-mana abilities, rather than the mana-abilities of lands), I don't see how this makes anything 'simpler' or 'more distinct' so much as just different. You might also be underestimating the new complexity associated with your suggested rules changes, and focussing just on what old complexity it would remove.
Regarding rules revamp; yes I think that is needed (especially since I think they spent the last decade or more writing themselves into corners). Or rather this; I think the whole mindset behind how they make the rules should change.
Consider this fictional card;
1/1 artifact creature for casting cost 2 colorless. Ability; Tap, put a land from your hand into play : add 1 to your mana pool. Now the Cobra triggers from activating a mana ability.
This card would make it so that Tessitori couldnt put out a blanket statement that Lotus Cobra's ability isnt a mana ability. The rule Tessitori quoted is really a rule based on interaction, and that is not really a rule in my eyes. The very base of CR is shaky since we talk about something as basic as the mana ability which is the most basic thing of all in mtg.
Idk, but I get the picture that WotC deliberately gives the opportunity for players to go "ha, ha I got you" when such a situation comes up where a player looses because he thought the Cobra ability is a mana ability. One aspect of that idea I support indeed, that things can be complicated, smarter player/rules-reader and all that, but when the thing in mind is so misleading by nature (illogical Id say) then I cant really put joy in that (particular game).
Seen the new card from gatecrash that makes all shroud creatures possible to target ? That card is an attack on restriction/permission rules as I see it.
"When a card contradicts the rules the card takes presedence" ---> I also think this rule should say the opposite.
At Anonymous two posts above: I agree, there are some lagoons on the rules, ant there are times when the comprehensive rules seem written for lawyer to dechipher.
I guess WotC has only one mana-speed from mana abilities to try to keep the most basic rule simple. Which might seem gamewise undeveloped to the trained eye could be utterly confusing for a non experienced player. I am not saying your suggestion is either good or bad, just trying to figure out a possible explanation.
Mark Rosewater has written several times that there are un-flavorful constants on the game in order to help players have smoother games and that WotC intends to attract new players.
At Santa Calus: Should your last statement become true, there would be no use (or need) for such cards. Other than discarding for some effect, what good is a card that would do nothing when played? That card you mention (Glaring Spotlight, I reckon) is surely there to figth Geist of Saint Traft and cards of the sort which were thought as threatening when developed. Look how the artifact does not affect creatures with shroud.
As a side note, remember that WotC fights enviroment stalling either by banning cards or by hosing them. The former is made on retrospective and the later must be tought forward. Banning is easier, but they have confessed it is not their favorite since it is harsher and players dislike it the most; so they have to procure a healty enviroment on advanced and without solid knowledge of the future. Sometimes they hit, others they miss.
Few things:
Consider this fictional card;
1/1 artifact creature for casting cost 2 colorless. Ability; Tap, put a land from your hand into play : add 1 to your mana pool. Now the Cobra triggers from activating a mana ability.
Lotus Cobra still isn't triggering off a mana ability, it's triggering off the land entering the battlefield.
Seen the new card from gatecrash that makes all shroud creatures possible to target ? That card is an attack on restriction/permission rules as I see it.
It's Hexproof creatures only and....
"When a card contradicts the rules the card takes precedence" ---> I also think this rule should say the opposite.
Makes not only Glaring Spotlight playable but a slew of other cards. If it were the opposite, there would be dozens of cards that wouldn't do anything. That's why the card trumps the rule, can't have dead cards in players decks/collections/hands and can't have players constantly checking the Comp Rules during play...
Also, the rules have never been better. I started in the days of interrupts and stack-less magic. I can tell you aside from a few niche cases (which there will always be in MtG) the game has never played smoother.
As for the 'ha ha I got you' mindset, that should only be happening at a Competitive REL and above. No player should fall victim to lack of rules knowledge at an FNM or any other Regular REL event because they are set up to be a fun learning experience for casual and just starting out players. But if you're going to be competitive, you're expected to know the rules, know the ins and outs of all your cards and how they interact with other cards in the format.