Proctection VS Non-Targetting

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

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

Hi there, i want ot make i understand the rules about protection right. In
the rules it says that protection from «» i protects from lethal damage and
spells who target. So protection from black is good against terror(target)
but not against diabolic edict (sacrifice).

So far i think i'm right. ;-)

Here is my question, I have Decree of Pain, the first part of the card (hard
casting) it is said that destroyed all creatures, so Protection from black
is NO good. For the cycling part it is said: All creatures gets -2/-2 until
end of turn, does protection from black kick in ??? is this correct or not
??

Thx in advance

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

Patrick Laurin <patrick_laurin@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> Hi there, i want ot make i understand the rules about protection right. In
> the rules it says that protection from «» i protects from lethal damage and
> spells who target. So protection from black is good against terror(target)
> but not against diabolic edict (sacrifice).

Among other things. Damage from such sources is prevented regardless of
whether that damage would be lethal.

> So far i think i'm right. ;-)
>
> Here is my question, I have Decree of Pain, the first part of the card (hard
> casting) it is said that destroyed all creatures, so Protection from black
> is NO good. For the cycling part it is said: All creatures gets -2/-2 until
> end of turn, does protection from black kick in ??? is this correct or not
> ??

502.7. Protection

502.7a Protection is a static ability, written "Protection from
[quality]." This quality is usually a color (as in "protection from
black") but can be any characteristic value. If the quality is a type,
subtype, or supertype, the protection applies to sources that are
permanents with that type, subtype, or supertype and to any sources not
in play that are of that type, subtype, or supertype.

502.7b A permanent with protection can't be targeted by spells with the
stated quality and can't be targeted by abilities from a source with the
stated quality.

502.7c A permanent with protection can't be enchanted by enchantments
that have the stated quality. Such enchantments enchanting the permanent
with protection will be put into their owners' graveyards as a
state-based effect. (See rule 420, "State-Based Effects.")

502.7d A permanent with protection can't be equipped by Equipment that
have the stated quality. Such an Equipment stops equipping that
permanent, but remains in play. (See rule 420, "State-Based Effects.")

502.7e Any damage that would be dealt by sources that have the stated
quality to a permanent that has protection is prevented.

502.7f If a creature with protection attacks, it can't be blocked by
creatures that have the stated quality.

502.7g Multiple instances of protection from the same quality on the
same permanent are redundant.

Nothing about this will interfere with the cycle triggered ability of
Decree of Pain.
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Patrick Laurin wrote:

> Hi there, i want ot make i understand the rules about protection right. In
> the rules it says that protection from «» i protects from lethal damage

No. It says it prevents all damage whose source has the characteristic
protected against. If you successfully place unprevented lethal damage
on the creature, protection cannot prevent it from being destroyed.
For example. I have a 4/4. A black source does 2 damage to it. After
that happens, I give it protection from black (it is now too late to
prevent the two black damage to it; it's already been inflicted).
Then a red source does two more damage to it. The 4/4 is destroyed.

> and spells who target.

No. It cannot be targetted by *anything* with the characteristic protected
against, whether it is a spell or not.

You also left out three things: Protection from X means that the permanent
cannot be blocked by X creatures, cannot be enchanted by X enchantments,
and cannot be equipped by X artifacts. Some people use this mnemonic,
DEBT:
Damage from X sources is prevented
Enchanting/Equipping by X Enchantments/Artifacts is illegal
Blocking by X creatures is illegal
Targeting by X spells and effects is illegal


> So protection from black is good against
> terror(target)

Correct. Terror cannot be used against a creature with protection from
black because it cannot target the creature. If the creature gains
protection from black after the Terror is declared but before it
resolves, it will not be a legal target on resolution and the Terror
will unable to affect it (and will be countered for having no legal
targets).

> but not against diabolic edict (sacrifice).

Also correct, but not because it's a sacrifice but because it doesn't
target. The two have no relation; Diabolic Edict doesn't target
because it doesn't use the word target.
>
> So far i think i'm right. ;-)
>
> Here is my question, I have Decree of Pain, the first part of the card
> (hard casting) it is said that destroyed all creatures, so Protection from
> black is NO good. For the cycling part it is said: All creatures gets
> -2/-2 until end of turn, does protection from black kick in ??? is this
> correct or not ??

Is it damage? No. (Toughness reduction is not damage) Is it targetted?
No, it does not use the word target. Is it an Enchantment or an Artifact,
or a creature you are attempting to declare as a blocker? No, so none
of those clauses apply. So protection doesn't do anything. The
ProBlack creature gets it's power and toughness both reduced by two
(like every other creature in play). If it's toughness is now zero or
less, it placed in the graveyard (*not* destroyed) as a state-based
effect.

> Thx in advance
>
> P.

--
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?)

Chris Mattern wrote:

> Patrick Laurin wrote:
>
>
>> but not against diabolic edict (sacrifice).
>
> Also correct, but not because it's a sacrifice but because it doesn't
> target. The two have no relation; Diabolic Edict doesn't target
> because it doesn't use the word target.

Excuse me, it *does* use the word target. But it targets a
player, not the creature to be sacrificed. So nothing that
makes the creature untargetable helps. But note that an
Ivory Mask prevents this card from being used on you.

--
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?)

«snip»

> You also left out three things: Protection from X means that the permanent
> cannot be blocked by X creatures, cannot be enchanted by X enchantments,
> and cannot be equipped by X artifacts. Some people use this mnemonic,
> DEBT:
> Damage from X sources is prevented
> Enchanting/Equipping by X Enchantments/Artifacts is illegal
> Blocking by X creatures is illegal
> Targeting by X spells and effects is illegal
>

Another question (well 3 in fact) , about blocking this times.

1- Blocking is illegal against a creature with protection, so there is no
way to block it, no damage is done because the blaock didn't happens right ?

2 - If a blocker is assigned and after that the attacking creature receive
a protection (from an instant) what happens ???

3- So can a creature (say a Sliver with provoke AND protection from black)
can it provoke a black creature ?? and if yes what happens



«snip also»
> 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?)

"Patrick Laurin" <patrick_laurin@sympatico.ca> writes:
> 1- Blocking is illegal against a creature with protection, so there is no
> way to block it, no damage is done because the blaock didn't happens right ?

I'm not quite sure I understand you, but I think you may have
something wrong there.

A creature with protection from X can't be blocked by creatures with
quality X. If a creature isn't blocked, it deals damage to the
defending player.

> 2 - If a blocker is assigned and after that the attacking creature receive
> a protection (from an instant) what happens ???

The blocking assignment doesn't get changed. Once it's blocked, it
stays blocked. It will, however, later prevent the combat damage
that's trying to get dealt to it by the blocking creature.

> 3- So can a creature (say a Sliver with provoke AND protection from black)
> can it provoke a black creature ?? and if yes what happens

Yes, it can. Once it's declared as an attacker, the provoke ability
triggers, targeting the black creature. Once that triggered ability
resolves, the attacking player may choose to untap it and make it
block the attacking creature this combat if able. But at the time of
declaring blockers, since it can't block the creature this combat,
that restriction doesn't apply, and it may block any legal attacker if
its controller so chooses.

I hope this helps. Please keep the questions coming for as long as you
have them.

--
Peter C.
"This document defines a reformulation of IP and two transport layer
protocols (TCP and UDP) as XML applications."
-- RFC 3252, "Binary Lexical Octet Ad-hoc Transport"
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Patrick Laurin <patrick_laurin@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> 1- Blocking is illegal against a creature with protection, so there is no
> way to block it, no damage is done because the blaock didn't happens right ?

Exactly.

"I block your White Knight with my Drudge Skeletons."
"No, you don't. My White Knight has protection from black."
"Well, then, I block your White Knight with my Forest."
"No. You don't. That's not a creature."
"Okay, I'll block with this Giant Growth."
"No. You. Don't."

> 2 - If a blocker is assigned and after that the attacking creature receive
> a protection (from an instant) what happens ???

Any damage that would be dealt by the blocker to the attacking creature
would be prevented.

502.7e Any damage that would be dealt by sources that have the stated
quality to a permanent that has protection is prevented.

501.3. Some creatures have abilities that restrict how they can block.
As with evasion abilities, these modify only the rules for the declare
blockers step of combat. (If a creature gains or loses an evasion
ability after a legal block has been declared, it doesn't affect that
block.)

> 3- So can a creature (say a Sliver with provoke AND protection from black)
> can it provoke a black creature ?? and if yes what happens

Yes, and not a lot.

502.29. Provoke

502.29a Provoke is a triggered ability. "Provoke" means "Whenever this
creature attacks, you may choose to have target creature defending
player controls block this creature this combat if able. If you do,
untap that creature."

502.29b If a creature has multiple instances of provoke, each triggers
separately.

The key words in rule 502.29a are "if able". The black creature isn't
able to block a creature with protection from black.
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Time to step up the meds; I could have sworn Patrick Laurin just said...
> Hi there, i want ot make i understand the rules about protection right. In
> the rules it says that protection from «» i protects from lethal damage and
> spells who target. So protection from black is good against terror(target)
> but not against diabolic edict (sacrifice).

Well, not just lethal damage; if something has protection from black,
*all* damage from black sources is prevented, lethal or otherwise.
Protection also does a couple of other things. But as far as Terror
versus Edict, you are correct.

> Here is my question, I have Decree of Pain, the first part of the card (hard
> casting) it is said that destroyed all creatures, so Protection from black
> is NO good. For the cycling part it is said: All creatures gets -2/-2 until
> end of turn, does protection from black kick in ??? is this correct or not
> ??

Decree of Pain (Scourge rare)
6BB
Sorcery
Destroy all creatures. They can=3Ft be regenerated. Draw a card for each
creature destroyed this way.
Cycling 3BB
When you cycle Decree of Pain, all creatures get -2/-2 until end of
turn.

Neither of these deal damage *or* involve targeting (nor are they
blocking or enchanting/equipping, the other things protection cares
about) so Protection from Black (or Protection from Sorceries) will have
no effect on them. (Neither will "This can't be the target of spells or
abilities", by the way.)
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

"Jeff Heikkinen" <no.way@jose.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c9a5de6fd9c338b98a0cb@news.easynews.com...
Time to step up the meds; I could have sworn Patrick Laurin just said...
> Hi there, i want ot make i understand the rules about protection right. In
> the rules it says that protection from «» i protects from lethal damage
> and
> spells who target. So protection from black is good against terror(target)
> but not against diabolic edict (sacrifice).

- Thx for your quick response !!! 😀

Well, not just lethal damage; if something has protection from black,
*all* damage from black sources is prevented, lethal or otherwise.
Protection also does a couple of other things. But as far as Terror
versus Edict, you are correct.

- Oups i thought lethal meant «any kind of damage»... (well my english is
rusty, and not my strongest language !!! )

> Here is my question, I have Decree of Pain, the first part of the card
> (hard
> casting) it is said that destroyed all creatures, so Protection from black
> is NO good. For the cycling part it is said: All creatures gets -2/-2
> until
> end of turn, does protection from black kick in ??? is this correct or not
> ??

Decree of Pain (Scourge rare)
6BB
Sorcery
Destroy all creatures. They can=3Ft be regenerated. Draw a card for each
creature destroyed this way.
Cycling 3BB
When you cycle Decree of Pain, all creatures get -2/-2 until end of
turn.

Neither of these deal damage *or* involve targeting (nor are they
blocking or enchanting/equipping, the other things protection cares
about) so Protection from Black (or Protection from Sorceries) will have
no effect on them. (Neither will "This can't be the target of spells or
abilities", by the way.)

-Ok, i mistaken get -2/-2 with 2 damage to each creatures like on Dry Spell.
So my other question is does Proctection from black block Dry Spell (or
similar), cause it does not target but does black damgage.

-My answer would be that protection work against Dry Spell or similar.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Patrick Laurin <patrick_laurin@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> -Ok, i mistaken get -2/-2 with 2 damage to each creatures like on Dry Spell.
> So my other question is does Proctection from black block Dry Spell (or
> similar), cause it does not target but does black damgage.

Protection from black will prevent the damage that Dry Spell would deal.

502.7e Any damage that would be dealt by sources that have the stated
quality to a permanent that has protection is prevented.
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Snip

> "I block your White Knight with my Drudge Skeletons."
> "No, you don't. My White Knight has protection from black."
> "Well, then, I block your White Knight with my Forest."
> "No. You don't. That's not a creature."
> "Okay, I'll block with this Giant Growth."
> "No. You. Don't."
>
RMOF !!!

HO Man i laugh so hard !!!

It is, a creature name short, the same thing happens when my wife began
playing !!!!! 😀

Thx for the laugh... even i a receive a few random item by the head while
laughing !!! ;-)






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

Patrick Laurin <patrick_laurin@sympatico.ca> sent:

[...]

>> Neither of these deal damage *or* involve targeting (nor are they
>> blocking or enchanting/equipping, the other things protection cares
>> about) so Protection from Black (or Protection from Sorceries) will have
>> no effect on them. (Neither will "This can't be the target of spells or
>> abilities", by the way.)

> -Ok, i mistaken get -2/-2 with 2 damage to each creatures like on Dry Spell.
> So my other question is does Proctection from black block Dry Spell (or
> similar), cause it does not target but does black damgage.

> -My answer would be that protection work against Dry Spell or similar.

Yes, protection from black, or from sorceries, will prevent the damage
that would be dealt by Dry Spell. I look at it as there being three
numbers on each creature - current power, current toughness, and
current amount of damage. When the damage equals or exceeds the
tougness, the creature is destroyed. Damage-dealing makes the damage
count go up, and toughness-reducing makes the toughness go down. They
both bring the creature closer to lethal damage.

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

Patrick Laurin wrote:

>
> «snip»
>
>> You also left out three things: Protection from X means that the
>> permanent cannot be blocked by X creatures, cannot be enchanted by X
>> enchantments,
>> and cannot be equipped by X artifacts. Some people use this mnemonic,
>> DEBT:
>> Damage from X sources is prevented
>> Enchanting/Equipping by X Enchantments/Artifacts is illegal
>> Blocking by X creatures is illegal
>> Targeting by X spells and effects is illegal
>>
>
> Another question (well 3 in fact) , about blocking this times.
>
> 1- Blocking is illegal against a creature with protection, so there is no
> way to block it, no damage is done because the blaock didn't happens right
> ?

Uh, wha? You can't block a creature with protection from foo with a
creature that is foo. It simply not legal to make that blocking
assignment. The consequences of the foo creature not blocking are
the same as if you had voluntarily made that choice. If the creature
with protection goes unblocked, it deals its damage to the defending
player just like any unblocked creature
>
> 2 - If a blocker is assigned and after that the attacking creature receive
> a protection (from an instant) what happens ???

Legality of blocks is *only* checked when blockers are declared at the
beginning of the Declare Blockers step. What happens to the "blockability"
of the attacker after that is irrelevant. For example, if I attack with
a non-flying creature, and you block with a non-flying creature, and after
you block I make the creature flying, it basically accomplishes nothing;
the creatures will battle as normal anyways. The attacker that gained
protection from its blocker will, of course, have all the damage the
blocker inflicts on it prevented.
>
> 3- So can a creature (say a Sliver with provoke AND protection from black)
> can it provoke a black creature ??

Yes. It can target the black creature, and there's nothing preventing it
from using the ability.

> and if yes what happens

The black creature untaps. Not much else. The black creature must block
the sliver if it can, but it can't, so it doesn't.
>
>

--
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?)

Patrick Laurin <patrick_laurin@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>Hi there, i want ot make i understand the rules about protection right. In
>the rules it says that protection from «» i protects from lethal damage and
>spells who target. So protection from black is good against terror(target)
>but not against diabolic edict (sacrifice).
>
>So far i think i'm right. ;-)

So far, yes. However, the rules say a bit more about protection, and spell
things out explicitly - so you don't have to guess:

502.7b A permanent with protection can't be targeted by spells with the stated
quality and can't be targeted by abilities from a source with the stated
quality.

502.7c A permanent with protection can't be enchanted by enchantments that have
the stated quality. Such enchantments enchanting the permanent with protection
will be put into their owners' graveyards as a state-based effect. (See rule
420, "State-Based Effects".)

502.7d A permanent with protection can't be equipped by Equipment that have the
stated quality. Such an Equipment stops equipping that permanent, but remains
in play. (See rule 420, "State-Based Effects".)

502.7e Any damage that would be dealt by sources that have the stated quality
to a permanent that has protection is prevented.

502.7f If a creature with protection attacks, it can't be blocked by creatures
that have the stated quality.

It's usually easier to remember these in a different order: Damage, Enchant /
Equip, Block, Target - D,E,B,T. If an effect isn't trying to damage, enchant
or equip, block, or target something, then it's not doing anything that
protection-from can help against.

>Here is my question, I have Decree of Pain, the first part of the card (hard
>casting) it is said that destroyed all creatures, so Protection from black
>is NO good. For the cycling part it is said: All creatures gets -2/-2 until
>end of turn, does protection from black kick in ??? is this correct or not
>??

Giving something -2/-2 isn't damage. (It's lowering of toughness, which is
much different, though this can -also- kill a creature.) This isn't enchanting
or equipping the creatures; it's not blocking them; and it's not targetting
anything, since the Cycling-triggered ability doesn't _say_ it targets
anything. (It -affects- all creatures; that's different from targetting them.)
So this isn't doing anything that protection from Black can help against, and
the pro-Black creatures get the -2/-2 along with everything else.

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?)

Patrick Laurin <patrick_laurin@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>-Ok, i mistaken get -2/-2 with 2 damage to each creatures like on Dry Spell.
>So my other question is does Proctection from black block Dry Spell (or
>similar), cause it does not target but does black damgage.

Protection from black DOES prevent any damage to the creature that would
be coming from a black source. Dry Spell is a black Sorcery, and deals 1
damage to each creature and player; a creature with protection from Black
will have the 1 damage to it from Dry Spell prevented, ys.

>-My answer would be that protection work against Dry Spell or similar.

Correct. Again, handy mnemonic: DEBT - Damage, Enchant/Equip, Block, Target;
these are the things protection-from works against.

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?)

Patrick Laurin <patrick_laurin@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>> You also left out three things: Protection from X means that the permanent
>> cannot be blocked by X creatures, cannot be enchanted by X enchantments,
>> and cannot be equipped by X artifacts. Some people use this mnemonic, DEBT:
>> Damage from X sources is prevented
>> Enchanting/Equipping by X Enchantments/Artifacts is illegal
>> Blocking by X creatures is illegal
>> Targeting by X spells and effects is illegal
>>
>
>Another question (well 3 in fact) , about blocking this times.

Okay.

>1- Blocking is illegal against a creature with protection, so there is no
>way to block it, no damage is done because the blaock didn't happens right ?

Um - no. The creature, if it attacks, can't be blocked by <quality> creatures.
For example, a White Knight can't be blocked by black creatures. This doesn't
stop creatures that AREN'T black from blocking it. This does NOT stop the
White Knight from -attacking-. If all the opponent has are black creatures,
then opponent can't block, and the White Knight will assign (and deal) its
2 damage directly to opponent.

If you're asking "Opponent tries to block, forgetting about the protection,
what happens then?", then opponent made an illegal block; it's undone and
the game backs up to just before opponent declared blockers, and opponent
gets to make some _legal_ declaration of blockers. Things proceed from there.
(If things got all the way to combat damage being dealt, well, since the
White Knight couldn't be blocked by a black creature, it couldn't very well
assign or deal combat damage to the black creature that couldn't block it in
the first place, now could it?)

>2 - If a blocker is assigned and after that the attacking creature receive
>a protection (from an instant) what happens ???

Nothing much. Whether the block is legal is checked ONLY as blockers are
being declared. Not before, and not afterwards. Giving an attacker an
"evasion ability" - one which says some creatures or all creatures can't
block it - AFTER it is already blocked does not, ever, "undo" the block or
remove the blockers from combat. You can't wait to see what blocks your
creature, then try to "unblock" it afterwards. If you have things you can
use to make it unblockable, or unblockable-by-Foo-creatures, you use them
_before_ opponent can declare blockers.

>3- So can a creature (say a Sliver with provoke AND protection from black)
>can it provoke a black creature ?? and if yes what happens

Certainly it can Provoke a black creature. Nothing about protection says
"black creatures can't be the target of abilities FROM this creature". The
Provoke can pick a black creature as its target just fine; when it resolves,
the creature's controller can untap it, and if they do it also gets "this
blocks if able". This in no way makes it ABLE to block that proBlack Sliver;
it just says it has to block it if it can. And it can't ... so it is free
to not block at all, or block something else.

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?)

Patrick Laurin wrote:
> Hi there, i want ot make i understand the rules about protection right. In
> the rules it says that protection from «» i protects from lethal damage and
> spells who target. So protection from black is good against terror(target)
> but not against diabolic edict (sacrifice).
>
> So far i think i'm right. ;-)
>
> Here is my question, I have Decree of Pain, the first part of the card (hard
> casting) it is said that destroyed all creatures, so Protection from black
> is NO good. For the cycling part it is said: All creatures gets -2/-2 until
> end of turn, does protection from black kick in ??? is this correct or not
> ??
>
> Thx in advance
>
> P.
>
>
>
For protection you should remember the acronoym DEBT. Protection
protects from the following

D - Damage from protected source
E - Enchanting/Equiping from protected source
B - Blocking from protected source
T - Targeting from protected source

So in your 1st example above (terror/diabolic edict) you are correct.
In your second example (Decree of Pain) both cycling and hard casting
DoP effects creatures with Pro Black becuase it does not damage,
enchant/equip, block, or target (only targets if TARGET is in the oracle
text) the card with Pro Black.

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

Hello, ok so if a creature with Proc Black is delt damage by a black source
(but is then prevented), do damage triggers trigger?

Example:
I have a creature with proc black, and a rite of passage in play.
my opponent activates pestilence, does my creature get the counter from rite
of passage?

The reason I am asking is, somebody told me that the damage on a protected
creature is dealt, but reduced to zero and if this is true, then my creature
should get the counter.
Please explain.... Thank you
Jonathan




"Michael Larson" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:FouYd.730$wL6.473@trnddc03...
Patrick Laurin wrote:
> Hi there, i want ot make i understand the rules about protection right. In
> the rules it says that protection from «» i protects from lethal damage
> and
> spells who target. So protection from black is good against terror(target)
> but not against diabolic edict (sacrifice).
>
> So far i think i'm right. ;-)
>
> Here is my question, I have Decree of Pain, the first part of the card
> (hard
> casting) it is said that destroyed all creatures, so Protection from black
> is NO good. For the cycling part it is said: All creatures gets -2/-2
> until
> end of turn, does protection from black kick in ??? is this correct or not
> ??
>
> Thx in advance
>
> P.
>
>
>
For protection you should remember the acronoym DEBT. Protection
protects from the following

D - Damage from protected source
E - Enchanting/Equiping from protected source
B - Blocking from protected source
T - Targeting from protected source

So in your 1st example above (terror/diabolic edict) you are correct.
In your second example (Decree of Pain) both cycling and hard casting
DoP effects creatures with Pro Black becuase it does not damage,
enchant/equip, block, or target (only targets if TARGET is in the oracle
text) the card with Pro Black.

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

Jonathan Fourie wrote:

> Hello, ok so if a creature with Proc Black is delt damage by a black
> source (but is then prevented), do damage triggers trigger?

No. Damage that is prevented (whatever the reason) has not actually
been dealt. Nothing that triggers on damage triggers when the damage
is prevented.
>
> Example:
> I have a creature with proc black, and a rite of passage in play.
> my opponent activates pestilence, does my creature get the counter from
> rite of passage?

Nope. The damage is prevented and is not dealt, so no counter for you.
>
> The reason I am asking is, somebody told me that the damage on a protected
> creature is dealt, but reduced to zero and if this is true, then my
> creature should get the counter.

Somebody is wrong.

> Please explain.... Thank you
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>


--
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?)

Jonathan Fourie <jonathan@jonREMOVEathan.za.net> wrote:
>Hello, ok so if a creature with Proc Black is delt damage by a black source
>(but is then prevented), do damage triggers trigger?

Nope. It's not "dealt, then prevented a moment later". Prevented damage
doesn't get dealt at _all_. So if all the damage is prevented, none of it got
dealt ... so nothing that would have triggered off its being dealt can
trigger, because it wasn't dealt, it was prevented (instead).

>Example:
>I have a creature with proc black, and a rite of passage in play.
>my opponent activates pestilence, does my creature get the counter from rite
>of passage?

Nope. It was not dealt any damage from the Pestilence; Pestilence -tried- to
deal 1 damage to it, but that damage was prevented. No damage was dealt to it.

>The reason I am asking is, somebody told me that the damage on a protected
>creature is dealt, but reduced to zero and if this is true, then my creature
>should get the counter.

This is not the case. Nothing in Magic has "reduced damage to zero" since
5th Edition, now quite some time ago. The damage that -would be- dealt to
it gets prevented, so never gets dealt. It does not 'get dealt, sit there a
moment, then get removed by the Prevention Removal Fairy', or anything like
that.

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?)

Jonathan Fourie wrote:
> Hello, ok so if a creature with Proc Black is delt damage by a black source
> (but is then prevented), do damage triggers trigger?
>
> Example:
> I have a creature with proc black, and a rite of passage in play.
> my opponent activates pestilence, does my creature get the counter from rite
> of passage?
>
> The reason I am asking is, somebody told me that the damage on a protected
> creature is dealt, but reduced to zero and if this is true, then my creature
> should get the counter.
> Please explain.... Thank you
> Jonathan
>

No the ceature does not get a counter. All the damage is prevented and
0 damage is not dealt, which does not trigger abilities that trigger on
damage being dealt.


Here are quotes from the comp rules:


502.7e Any damage that would be dealt by sources that have the stated
quality to a permanent that has protection is prevented.


419.5a If a source would deal 0 damage, it does not deal damage at all.
That means abilities that trigger on damage being dealt won’t trigger.
It also means that replacement effects that increase damage dealt have
no event to replace when 0 damage is dealt, so they have no effect.


MJ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom