|
|
| Author |
Message |
ck3gds
Joined: 21 Jun 2005 Posts: 995
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:50 am Post subject: Reduction of Commander damage? |
|
|
This was the exact situation that cropped up during a Commander game.
I was piloting my Edric, Spymaster of Trest deck. I controlled a bunch of creatures, in addition to my Commander.
My opponent controlled some creatures, including a Jhessian Balmgiver and a Phantasmal Image of that. Relevant ability here is "T: Prevent the next 1 damage that would be dealt to target creature or player this turn."
During combat, after blockers have been declared, my Commander (2/2) and Invisible Stalker (1/1) were unblocked.
Before combat damage, he activated the damage prevention ability of both creatures, targeting himself.
Question: since the ability of Jhessian Balmgiver doesn't explicitly state that damage from a chosen source is prevented, how much Commander damage is dealt - is it still 2 (despite the prevention), or can he choose it to be 0 (Commander "chosen" for both abilities) or 1 (Commander "chosen" for one of the abilities)? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Candace
Joined: 08 Jun 2012 Posts: 35
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| If the owner of the prevention effect is taking damage from multiple sources simultaneously, he can choose which of the 2 damage to prevent. In this scenario that generally means you'll be dealing zero commander damage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Clariax Level 3 Judge
Joined: 16 Jan 2006 Posts: 173
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It doesn't matter who controls the prevention effect. It's the person that is being damaged that gets to choose which damage the prevention effect gets applied to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ck3gds
Joined: 21 Jun 2005 Posts: 995
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2012 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So what you're saying is that this is the case even though the ability doesn't explicitly state that you choose a source from which to prevent damage? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Candace
Joined: 08 Jun 2012 Posts: 35
|
Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yes, that is what I said. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
magicman85
Joined: 22 Aug 2009 Posts: 548
|
Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | If the owner of the prevention effect is taking damage from multiple sources simultaneously |
Not "the owner of the prevention effect" it is the person who's damage is being prevented. Not an easy way to term that in the english language. But thats how it is...enjoy! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Candace
Joined: 08 Jun 2012 Posts: 35
|
Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2012 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | it is the person who's damage is being prevented. |
This phrasing actually refers to his opponent. Perhaps you should stop nitpicking my statement, as you're only making an actual difference out of something that's nearly irrelevant  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Egren
Joined: 16 Jun 2008 Posts: 18
|
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
When it comes to magic rules, not only is nitpicking okay, it's obligatory  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|