Corrupt and Radiate

G

Guest

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

Hello.

Player A is at 15 life and has 10 swamps and a 3/3 creature in play.
Player B is at 10 life and has no swamps and a 5/5 creature in play.

Player A casts corrupt at player B and then player B responds by playing
radiate.
What happens?
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

"Jimmy Wong" <j4389130@telus.net> writes:
> Player A is at 15 life and has 10 swamps and a 3/3 creature in play.
> Player B is at 10 life and has no swamps and a 5/5 creature in play.
>
> Player A casts corrupt at player B and then player B responds by playing
> radiate.

,----[ Oracle ]
| Corrupt
| {5}{B}
| Sorcery
| Corrupt deals damage equal to the number of Swamps you control to
| target creature or player. You gain life equal to the damage dealt
| this way.
|
| Radiate
| {3}{R}{R}
| Instant
| Choose target instant or sorcery spell that targets only a single
| permanent or player. For each other permanent or player that spell
| could target, put a copy of the spell onto the stack. Each copy
| targets a different one of those permanents and players.
`----

> What happens?

For sake of simplicity, I'll assume nobody has anything else they want
to play to complicate things.

When Radiate resolves, 3 copies of Corrupt go on the stack, one
targeting the 3/3, one targeting the 5/5, and one targeting Player
A. Player B (the controller of Radiate) chooses the order. He'd likely
put the copies like this (so the opponent's stuff dies first):

== Top of Stack ==
Copy-Corrupt targeting Player A
Copy-Corrupt targeting 3/3 creature
Copy-Corrupt targeting 5/5 creature
Corrupt targeting Player B
== Bottom of Stack ==

(Other orders will end up having the same net result.)

Now, I'm 78% sure that Player A still controls all those copies. (I
can't find anything *saying* so in the rules, however. The controller
of a spell is the person who played it, and 503.10 explicitly says
that a copy isn't "played". So I assume that it copies controller as
well. I'll provide the alternative answer if I'm wrong on this point
below.)

So, since nobody has anything else left to play, each of these will
end up resolving in turn.

- Player A takes 10 damage and gains 10 life. (Still at 15 life)
(Note that even if he had less than 10 life, he still wouldn't
have died here since he regains it before the spell finishes
resolving.)
- The 3/3 creature gets smacked for 10 and Player A gains 10 life. The
3/3 dies due to having lethal damage.
- The 5/5 creature gets 10 damage handed to it, and Player A gains
another 10 life. The 5/5 dies.
- Player B takes 10 damage and Player A gains 10 life. Player B loses
the game since his life total is now 0. (In case you were curious,
Player A's life total is now 45.)

Now, if I were wrong on my previous point, and Player B has control of
those copies:
- Player A takes 0 damage and Player B gains 0 life.
- The 3/3 takes 0 damage and Player B gains 0 life.
- The 5/5 takes 0 damage and Player B gains 0 life.
- Player B takes 10 damage and Player A gains 10 life. Player B dies
due to having 0 life, and Player A has 25 life.

So, playing Radiate didn't help, regardless.

Hope that this helped. Please post again if you have any more
questions or want more clarification.

--
Peter C.
I've discovered that I often visit the state of confusion, and I know
my way around pretty well.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Jimmy Wong <j4389130@telus.net> wrote:
>Player A is at 15 life and has 10 swamps and a 3/3 creature in play.
>Player B is at 10 life and has no swamps and a 5/5 creature in play.
>
>Player A casts corrupt at player B and then player B responds by playing
>radiate.
>What happens?

B, unfortunately, still loses.
A announces Corrupt, puts it on the stack, chooses target (B), pays mana cost.
This is all A does here; the number of swamps A controls has not got a reason
to be counted yet.
A passes.
B announces Radiate, picks its target (Corrupt), pays mana cost. This is all
B does right here too.
B passes.
A passes.
Radiate resolves: B puts three copies of Corrupt on the stack, one targetting
A, one targetting the 3/3, and one targetting the 5/5. B can arrange their
order as B chooses. B controls all three copies because B was told to put them
on the stack.
The next bit repeats three times:
{A passes. B passes. Copy of Corrupt resolves, checks its target is still
legal, counts B's swamps - zero, deals no damage at all, and gives B no life.
Copy of Corrupt is put into B's graveyard and evaporates because it's just a
copy, not a card.}
Finally: A passes, B passes. A's Corrupt resolves, checking that B is still a
legal target, counts A's swamps (10), deals 10 damage to B (taking B to zero),
gives A ten life. Corrupt goes to A's graveyard. B loses the game, with B at
0 and A at 25, and both creatures in play.

The copies B puts on the stack through B's Radiate are controlled by B, and
have no particular reason to count _A's_ Swamps on resolution.

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

Peter Cooper Jr. <pete@cooper.homedns.org> wrote:
>| Radiate >| {3}{R}{R} >| Instant
>| Choose target instant or sorcery spell that targets only a single
>| permanent or player. For each other permanent or player that spell
>| could target, put a copy of the spell onto the stack. Each copy
>| targets a different one of those permanents and players.
>
>(Other orders will end up having the same net result.)

True.

>Now, I'm 78% sure that Player A still controls all those copies.

Nope. Who was told to put them onto the stack? B was. "Controller" isn't
something that anything can copy.

>can't find anything *saying* so in the rules, however. The controller
>of a spell is the person who played it, and 503.10 explicitly says
>that a copy isn't "played". So I assume that it copies controller as
>well. I'll provide the alternative answer if I'm wrong on this point
>below.)

Copiable values are listed in 503.2; "controller" isn't among them. Copied
spells get an extra glob of stuff copied - 503.10: all -decisions- made
when the spell was announced. But "who controls me?" wasn't a decision, it's
forced by the rules: A controls the Corrupt because A played it. The copies
made by B's Radiate are controlled by B.

>Now, if I were wrong on my previous point, and Player B has control of
>those copies:

Correct.

>- Player A takes 0 damage and Player B gains 0 life.
>- The 3/3 takes 0 damage and Player B gains 0 life.
>- The 5/5 takes 0 damage and Player B gains 0 life.
>- Player B takes 10 damage and Player A gains 10 life. Player B dies
> due to having 0 life, and Player A has 25 life.

Yep. Oops.

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

dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) writes:
> Peter Cooper Jr. <pete@cooper.homedns.org> wrote:
>>| Radiate >| {3}{R}{R} >| Instant
>>| Choose target instant or sorcery spell that targets only a single
>>| permanent or player. For each other permanent or player that spell
>>| could target, put a copy of the spell onto the stack. Each copy
>>| targets a different one of those permanents and players.
>>
>>Now, I'm 78% sure that Player A still controls all those copies.
>
> Nope. Who was told to put them onto the stack? B was. "Controller"
> isn't something that anything can copy.
>
>>I can't find anything *saying* so in the rules, however. The
>>controller of a spell is the person who played it, and 503.10
>>explicitly says that a copy isn't "played". So I assume that it
>>copies controller as well.
>
> Copiable values are listed in 503.2; "controller" isn't among
> them. Copied spells get an extra glob of stuff copied - 503.10: all
> -decisions- made when the spell was announced. But "who controls
> me?" wasn't a decision, it's forced by the rules: A controls the
> Corrupt because A played it. The copies made by B's Radiate are
> controlled by B.

Well, I understand now that that's the correct interpretation. But
I'm looking at these two rules:

| 200.5a [...] A spell's controller is the player who played it.
|
| 503.10. To copy a spell means to put a copy of the spell onto the
| stack; a copy of a spell isn't "played." [...]

(The glossary entry for Controller says about the same thing as
200.5a.) From the rules, it's not immediately clear who the controller
is of a spell that wasn't played. Saying that the answer is "the
person who put the copy there" is a perfectly reasonable and correct
answer, but I don't see it in the rules anywhere. Am I missing
something, or should the rules state this somewhere?

--
Peter C.
"Could you please continue the petty bickering? I find it most
intriguing."
-- Data, "Haven", Star Trek, The Next Generation
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Peter Cooper Jr. wrote:

> dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) writes:
>> Peter Cooper Jr. <pete@cooper.homedns.org> wrote:
>>>| Radiate >| {3}{R}{R} >| Instant
>>>| Choose target instant or sorcery spell that targets only a single
>>>| permanent or player. For each other permanent or player that spell
>>>| could target, put a copy of the spell onto the stack. Each copy
>>>| targets a different one of those permanents and players.
>>>
>>>Now, I'm 78% sure that Player A still controls all those copies.
>>
>> Nope. Who was told to put them onto the stack? B was. "Controller"
>> isn't something that anything can copy.
>>
>>>I can't find anything *saying* so in the rules, however. The
>>>controller of a spell is the person who played it, and 503.10
>>>explicitly says that a copy isn't "played". So I assume that it
>>>copies controller as well.
>>
>> Copiable values are listed in 503.2; "controller" isn't among
>> them. Copied spells get an extra glob of stuff copied - 503.10: all
>> -decisions- made when the spell was announced. But "who controls
>> me?" wasn't a decision, it's forced by the rules: A controls the
>> Corrupt because A played it. The copies made by B's Radiate are
>> controlled by B.
>
> Well, I understand now that that's the correct interpretation. But
> I'm looking at these two rules:
>
> | 200.5a [...] A spell's controller is the player who played it.
> |
> | 503.10. To copy a spell means to put a copy of the spell onto the
> | stack; a copy of a spell isn't "played." [...]
>
> (The glossary entry for Controller says about the same thing as
> 200.5a.) From the rules, it's not immediately clear who the controller
> is of a spell that wasn't played. Saying that the answer is "the
> person who put the copy there" is a perfectly reasonable and correct
> answer, but I don't see it in the rules anywhere. Am I missing
> something, or should the rules state this somewhere?
>
I think he's right. Since a copy of a spell isn't played, the rules
on who controls a spell don't cover it. The copy rules don't fill in
this hole, either.
--
Christopher Mattern

"Which one you figure tracked us?"
"The ugly one, sir."
"...Could you be more specific?"
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Peter Cooper Jr. <pete@cooper.homedns.org> wrote:
>dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) writes:
>> Nope. Who was told to put them onto the stack? B was. "Controller"
>> isn't something that anything can copy.
....
>(The glossary entry for Controller says about the same thing as
>200.5a.) From the rules, it's not immediately clear who the controller
>is of a spell that wasn't played. Saying that the answer is "the
>person who put the copy there" is a perfectly reasonable and correct
>answer, but I don't see it in the rules anywhere. Am I missing
>something, or should the rules state this somewhere?

Probably they should. I'll pass it on up. Note that it's not an issue for
Storm, Mirari, or Ertai's Meddling, because the same player is putting the
copy on the stack that controlled the original - but is one for Fork and
Radiate, and all the Chain spells. Isochron Scepter / Spellbinder / Spellweaver
Helix / Panoptic Mirror / Reversal of Fortune all have you play the copy, so no
problem there.

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.