MTG

2101 readers

6 users here now

Magic: the Gathering discussion

General discussion, questions, and media related to Magic: the Gathering that doesn't fit within a more specific community. Our equivalent of /r/magicTCG!

Type [[Card name]] in your posts and comments and CardBot will reply with a link to the card! More info here.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Which damage gets prevented? (idiomdrottning.org)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Which damage gets prevented?

So in a game of @[email protected] the other day, my enemy attacked with Mons's Goblin Raiders and Ghyrson. Which would normally deal four damage total then two more from Ghyrson. But I had played a Bandage, preventing "the next" damage. If that next damage is the one from the Goblins, I don't get the extra Ghyrson damage, so that's why it matters.

There was no first strike in this particular situation.

top 12 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

@Sandra @mtg Naively, I would think the goblins' damage would be prevented, such that Ghyrson doesn't fire? The wording of Ghyrson sounds like it triggers off of a source of damage resolving, such that it couldn't happen before or simulntaneously with the goblins' damage.

That is, I'd see it roughly as:

• Blockers are assigned
• Bandage goes on the stack
• Bandage resolves
• Damage resolution: Goblins do 1 damage
• Ghyrson's trigger sees the damage

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Thank you! The issue is that Ghyrson and the goblins do their damage simultaneously (3+1-1=3, but if that's 2+1 I still get shot but if that's 3+0 I don't).

@[email protected] @[email protected]

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@Sandra @mtg Ah, got it, I'd missed that Ghyrson was also attacking, sorry, now I see the problem. Oh, wow, that is a bit hairy... even reading the CRs it seems like there's no real resolution to what "next" means in that case?

The Gatherer rulings on Bandage are similarly useless, I wonder if there's another prevent-next effect that might have more useful rulings?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@Sandra @mtg OH! I found something!

615.7. [...] If damage would be dealt to the shielded permanent or player by two or more applicable sources at the same time, the player or the controller of the permanent chooses which damage the shield prevents. [...]

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@Sandra @mtg If I understand right, you as the player being damaged get to choose which point of damage Bandage prevents out of the four incoming points... if you choose to block that assigned by the goblins, then there's nothing for Ghryson to trigger off of, I think, so you get the 3 + 0 case?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@xgranade @Sandra @mtg and there are similar rules for otder types of replacement effects, the affected player gets to pick the order of replacements (some orders can cause other replacement effects to no longer apply)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@lovestha @Sandra @mtg Right, this is just a bit of a funny one in that there's only one prevention effect, but multiple things it could apply to, instead of multiple effects applying to the same thing.

It makes sense a similar design philosophy holds in both cases, but without there being a separate 615.7, I'm not sure how you'd resolve the goblins + Ghyrson + Bandage example.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@xgranade @Sandra @mtg you wouldn't, and there are *many* similar interactions, so having a solid reference isn't surprising.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@xgranade @Sandra @mtg that unded like i'm impjying you are shocked there is an answer.

I'm not, i'm just tired after driving home after an excellent weekend of judging. Good night (before i imply more things i don't mean)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

@lovestha @Sandra @mtg I didn't read it that way at all, it's helpful context, thank you! I'm absolutely not a judge, so I appreciate learning more about!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

@[email protected]

So in the end I am safe from Ghyrson shooting me with his autostubs? Then we played it right.♥︎

@[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

That’s how I’m reading this too.