Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (
More info?)
Keith Piddington <uj551@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca> wrote:
>Brings up a question that has bugged me for years...
>
>: Note that some
>: abilities cause a source to do something (for example, "Prodigal
>: Sorcerer deals 1 damage to target creature or player") rather than the
>: ability doing anything directly. In these cases, any activated or
>: triggered ability that references information about the source will
>: check that information when the ability resolves, or will use the
>: source's last known information if it's no longer in play.
>
>Does *not* fit perfectly. Why, if an ability becomes independent
>once activated/triggered, is it able to refer back to its source
>for any reason after being a/t'ed? To be truly independent, and
>to follow the logic of the first parts of this rule, any and all
>information regarding the ability (damage colour, source type,
>etc., etc.) should be locked in once it gets onto the stack.
>Changing the source should not affect the ability any more than
>changing the ability affects the source.
Changing the source doesn't affect the ability or its text. However, if the
effect _tells a source to do something_, the effect gets its information from
the game on resolution (413.2f, not the same rule you're looking at here)...
so gets its information -about- the source that's dealing the damage then. It
doesn't in any way "lock in what the source referred to in the effect looks
like on announcement". [Same for its own source, by the way.]
So if the source that the effect will tell to deal the damage "looks different"
by resolution time, it's the source-as-it-looks-now that the damage comes
from, not the source-as-it-was-back-then.
Now if the source -goes missing- in between, there is no information about
it available -right now-. In this case, the game says "Well, when last we saw
Our Hero, he looked like -this-" - this is where "last known information"
comes in. If he changed how he looked and then left play? How he looked when
he left play is used.
>Why are removal of source and change to source treated differently?
They're not, not as such. In both cases, the most recent information is used.
But if the source is still there, that's "the CURRENT information about it",
while if the source isn't there any more, that's "the last known information
we had before it vanished".
>An example of the difference, using good ol' Tim:
>
>Version 1:
>A: Tap PS for 1 point damage targeting Order of Leitbur (2/1 pro-
>black). Assume nothing else relevant in play except mana sources.
>B: Cast Terror targeting PS. All pass.
>Terror resolves, PS goes to graveyard.
>PS ability resolves, O-of-L takes 1 point damage, dies, and goes to
>graveyard.
Right. 1 point of damage from a blue 1/1 Wizard creature A controlled ... not
"1 point of damage from a blue creature card in A's graveyard".
>Version 2:
>A: tap PS for 1 point damage targeting Order of Leitbur, as above.
>B: cast Deathlace targeting PS. All pass.
>Deathlace resolves, PS becomes black.
>PS ability tries to resolve but as source is now black, damage is
>now black, O-of-L has pro-black, nothing happens.
Right. In this case it doesn't matter where the damage is from, the -ability-
is now from a black source, and can't target a creature with pro-black. The
ability gets countered and has no effect at all - it never even tries to deal
the damage.
>What is the rationale or logic for treating removal and change
>differently like this?
What "differently"? Both are using the latest available information about
the source.
> In version 2, changing the source to
>black after the ability has been launched should not affect
>it *if the ability is truly independent*. (this is the intuitive
>way, as per the first sentence of 402.6.)
The ability -is- independent. BUT pro-black does not ask about the ABILITY,
it asks about the SOURCE OF the ability. The ability doesn't have any
characteristics at all other than its text; it is not a "black ability",
a "Wizard ability", a "creature ability", etc. It's an ability _from_ a
black 1/1 Wizard creature... and if where the ability is FROM changes, then
where the ability is from _changes_.
>I know I'm not putting this very clearly; I'm hoping you
>understand my confusion here.
I think I know where it's coming from; it's not an uncommon problem,
conceptually. You just have to realize that the ability itself is not "a
blue ability", and the damage the ability makes is not 'blue damage'. Rather,
both are "from a blue source"... and thus get to track what happens to the
source, in a fairly natural manner.
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.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram