Decimate

Discussion in 'Rules Questions' started by Killer Joe, Aug 22, 2006.

  1. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    Yes I think it would have to regen as many times as it was targetted. Regen is a replacement effect for the next time it would be destroyed. When Decimate resolves, if it is targetted several times, it is destroyed several times, so you should regenerate is several times.

    Confirmation from anyone?
  2. Jigglypuff Big Cute Pink Thing

    My gut says no, but I'll pose this on the newsgroup as well. My gut says no because Decimate is only one spell and can therefore only destroy the targeted card once. It wouldn't destroy it as a creature, and then destroy it again as an artifact.

    (- Steve -)
  3. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    I don't think so. But as everyone knows, I have been mistaken before.

    420.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 408, “Timing of Spells and Abilities”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based effects. All applicable effects resolve as a single event, then the check is repeated. Once no more state-based effects have been generated, triggered abilities go on the stack, and then the appropriate player gets priority. This check is also made during the cleanup step (see rule 314); if any of the listed conditions apply, the active player receives priority.


    Seems like the "go to the graveyard" for all of the destroys would resolve as one and be replaced by one regen..
  4. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    This is not the right part of the rules; When a Cone of Flame would kill three target creatures, each of them is assigned the damage during the resolution of Cone of Flame. Then, before the active player gets priority, state-based effects are checked and three creature are found to have taken lethal damage. Putting those three creature into the graveyard is considered to be a single event.

    Consider a spell that would say "Destroy two target creatures". During the resolution of this spell, the creatures are destroyed and put into the graveyard (it doesn't wait for state-based effects, because destroying puts them into the graveyard). If either of them has a regen-shield, it would replace the part of this spell that destroys it during resolution (replacing it with "remove all damage, remove it from combat and tap it")

    A spell that would say "Destroy target creature. Destroy target creature" would work the same. So both parts of the resolvement of this spell need to be replaced if the creature (or creatures) want to survive.

    So if the "Destroy target creature. Destroy target creature" would target the same creature twice, it would need two regen shields to survive.

    I think :)
  5. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    Except that the resolution of the spell is not 2 seperate events, one waiting for the other to happen and then being applied. It's not destroy a target, wait to see what happens and then destroy the next target, then wait to see what happens and then repeat. Its do it all at once.

    But then again, I'm not sure.

    Think of it like a spell that says "deals 2 damage to target creature and deals 2 damage to target creature" (choosing the same 2/2 creature)
    It wouldn't deal 2 damage and then wait to see if the creature regen'd and then deal 2 more damage to kill it.
  6. EricBess Active Member

    It is my understanding that based on the wording of Decimate, each target is destroyed once, even if the target was "targetted" multiple times.

    If the card text were broken up into multiple paragraphs, or included "then...", then the events don't really happen simultaneously and each individual destruction would need to be replaced independentely. However, since the destructions are all worded as a single event, each target is only destroyed once, regardless of how many times it was chosen as a target.

    BTW - Limited is correct that there is a huge difference in how removal cards work. Cards that "destroy" put the card into the graveyard as part of the effect of the card (unless the card regenerates, which replaces the destruction). Cards that deal damage or lower toughness never actually destroy the creature. It is always the state-based effect that checks after the card finishes resolving that destroys the card or, in the case of toughness reduced to 0, places it in the graveyard. Since Decimate says "destroy", the state-based effects don't enter in.
  7. Killer Joe Active Member

    Okay, for the academically challenged (as in ME!) let me give this a 'go'.

    ~I play a spell that says "Destroy Permanant" I do all the things you're supposed to do when playing a spell or ability i.e. choose target, determine cost etc...
    ~The spell is now on the stack.
    ~The spell resolves barring any counter magic or what not and the targetted permanant goes to the graveyard.

    right?

    next:

    ~I play a spell that says "{This} deals 2 damage to target creature." I do all the things you're supposed to do when playing a spell or ability i.e. choose target, determine cost etc...
    ~The spell goes on the stack.
    ~The spell resolves barring any counter magic or what not BUT the targetted permanant doesn't go into the graveyard until SBE's are checked?

    Is that how it goes?

    Cripe, working on my MUED Masters Degree was waaaaay easier :rolleyes:
  8. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    That is correct: that creatures are destroyed when they've received damage equal or more than their toughness (lethal damage), is a game rule and not part of damage dealing.

    Note however, that since State-Based Effects are always checked first after an spell/ability resolves, and now players have priority during this check (so they can't play any spells) its could have been part of damage dealing.
  9. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    It is not part of the damage dealing, although no player actually has priority, so no response is possible.

    Damage has been dealt, spell is resolved, ability is resolved...... yada yada yada
    Then, voila....

    420.3. Whenever a player would get priority

    From now on preface all my ruling statements with....
    "IMHRK" (In my humble rules knowledge)
    :eek:
  10. Killer Joe Active Member

    So, I'm NOT correct? Or, the spell resolves; the damage is dealt; and there's not SQUAT anyone can do about it, is that what's going on?
  11. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    Not correct about what?
  12. Lythand Veteran CPA Member

    I can say one thing. I blocked a creature with stink weed imp. the imp did enough damage to kill it. the player regenerated it, then stink weeks ability kicked in and killed the creature. My opponant was dumb founded and I explained he had to regenerate it twice.
  13. Killer Joe Active Member

    That the 2 damage I mentioned in fact is not dealt to the targetted creature until SBE's are checked as oppose to; the damage is dealt and resolves at the exact same time the damage spell resolves.
  14. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    The damage is dealt during spell resolution. Then, when a player is about to gain priority, SBE are checked and the creature is sent to the GY.
  15. Jigglypuff Big Cute Pink Thing

    This has gotten totally out of hand. Let me make some important points:

    * I Lightning Bolt a random 3/3 creature. It resolves. As part of the resolution of the spell, 3 damage is dealt to the creature. Before the active player gains priority again, SBE's are checked. The game sees a creature that has taken damage equal to or greater than it's toughness. The game rules eliminate the offending creature. Regeneration would then replace this event.

    * I Terror a random 3/3 creature. It resolves. As part of the resolution of the spell, it is destroyed. Regeneration would then replace that event.

    * Pringles are the perfect potato chip because each one is perfectly identical to the others.

    (- Steve -)
  16. Mooseman Isengar Tussle

    Except the ones with trivia printed on them...... :D
  17. EricBess Active Member

    Yes, Jigglypuff has it. KJ, unless I missed something, you had it right also the first time. I think you got confused because of the clarification that even though it doesn't die as part of the resolution of the spell, there still isn't a time between the resolution of the spell and the creature going to the graveyard when responses can happen. If you want the creature to regenerate, the shield needs to be in place before the damage is dealt.

    Most of the time, the distinction between the two types of "removal" doesn't really matter. However, there are cards that say (to the effect of) "...whenever an effect controlled by an opponent destroys a monster you control..." which would trigger off of a Terror, but not off of a Lightning Bolt since the Lightning Bolt doesn't actually destroy the creature, it just deals damage and the creature is destroyed "by the game rules".

    I'm glad we've taking this thread completely off topic ;)
  18. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    I think I know why TPTB have chosen to do it like this.

    Suppose you Lightning Bolt a 5/5 creature. It isn't put into the gy when SBE's are checked, because three isn't enough damage. You follow the Bolt up with a Last Gasp (target creature gets -3/-3). The creature doesn't die to the Last Gasp, because it becomes a 2/2, but SBE's are checked and they find a 2/2 creature which has had 3 damage.

    The point I'm trying to make, is that you its hard to prevent which spells can result in a creature receiving lethal damage, so you'd better check for lethal damage after every spell/ ability resolves.
  19. Jigglypuff Big Cute Pink Thing

    Ummm, the semi-original question was why did TPTB choose to change the rules about choosing multiple targets. Which was already answered. Everything else was an irrelevant tangent. Except for that part about the Pringles.

    (- Steve -)
  20. Limited Yes, but we won't care

    There was a question from Killer Joe about damage and SBE's; I thought my previous remark would make it more clear.

    Sorry for going of-topic

Share This Page