Necromancy questions

Discussion in 'Rules Questions' started by Terentius, May 15, 2006.

  1. Terentius The Instigator

    What would happen if I brought back Mother of Runes with Necromancy, then next turn tapped to use her ability to give her protection from black?

    What would happen if I played Necromancy and targeted a creature with protection from black?
  2. Lythand Veteran CPA Member

    Mother of ruins would loose the Necromancy cause she has pro black and the Necromancy and the Mother would both go to the graveyard. Necromancy can not target a problack creature.
  3. Terentius The Instigator

    Even though the bury effect from Necromancy is a black effect targeting Mother of Runes?

    And I thought creatures don't have protection in graveyards?
  4. Nightstalkers Creature — Nightstalker

    Don't see it in the rules that protection protects it in the graveyard.
    "Note that cards in the graveyard do not have Protection from Color abilities (see Rule 402.8)"

    Think about Necromancy as a life-force, and Mother of Runes as a creature sustained by the Necromancy. If Mother of Runes decides that her protection for that color goes on, the life-force sucks out of her (Indiana Jones the Last Crusade moment) and she falls into the graveyard.

    "When ~this~ leaves play, destroy enchanted creature"
  5. orgg Administrator

    An Enchantment enchanting a creature with Protection from its color is put into the graveyard as a state based effects because of Protection. This has been this way for YEARS. An illigal "attachment" will simply stop happening-- with Auras, this means they'll be put into the graveyard as a state based effect. (Rule 502.7)

    Here's something that's recently changed; this rules "trick" I'm about to tell you is probably on the Endangered Spiecies List of rules cheese.

    When you play Necromancy (An enchantment that puts a creature from your graveyard into play, THEN becomes an Aura, then gets attached to that creature), the creature comes into play. However, because of Rule 212.4e's last line (If an Aura is coming into play from any zone other than the stack and there is no legal permanent for it to enchant, the Aura remains in the zone from which it attempted to move instead of coming into play; The same rule applies to moving an Aura from one permanent to another: The permanent to which the Aura is to be moved must be able to be enchanted by it. If it can't, the Aura doesn't move.), the Necromancy cannot be put onto the Pro:Black creature, it will be put into the graveyard as a state based effect (212.4f) and the Pro:B creature will remain in play.

    Expect Necromancy, Animate Dead, and DAnce of the Dead to be erratta'd soon to have the enchantments turn into auras attached to the creature. This would make them function as they did at one point.

    First off, the 'bury' effect doesn't target Mother of Runes. I believe the current version of Necromancy 'destroys' the creature if Necromancy leaves play. I don't believe it ever said "target" with the "bury" effect.

    And on the last point, you are correct. Protection only functions while the permanant is in play.
  6. BigBlue Magic Jones

    isn't it Destroy - and can't be regenerated? you couldn't then play a death ward or something to keep it in play...

    I love how they make rules loopholes like leaving pro-black creatures in play because of their convoluted wordings... animate dead was such an easy to understand card...

    For the reference of those who don't know the cards:


    Current Oracle Wording:

  7. orgg Administrator

    Good Point.

    Let me make sure that my last little bit is true-- If the card said "with Necromancy attached" instead of "and attach Necromancy to it" the card would function as it originally did, correct?
  8. Nightstalkers Creature — Nightstalker

    The wording is correct with the oracle stating. The card and Necromancy come into play at the same time, so it doesn't dance around allowing you to get it in play without the necromancy.

    When Necromancy resolves you've got a Necromancy on a creature that it can't be attached to, so it removes Necromancy. Necromancy goes to the graveyard (leaves play) and then says "you're coming with me!" and your creature dies.

    If you notice in the wording of Necromancy's oracle text, it doesn't say "target" when destroying the creature.

    Now if the creature had industructable, you'd have to talk to someone with a judge ranking to get a clear and cut answer because in my experience, the creature would not be able to be killed by the necromancy now.
  9. BigBlue Magic Jones

    Oooh.... that's something I hadn't thought of...
  10. Terentius The Instigator

    Oh, I wasn't looking at the oracle text, rather what the old card itself said:

    "...Necromancy becomes a creature enchantment that targets the creature. When Necromancy leaves play, bury the creature."

    But you're right, I guess it never said, "...bury target creature."
  11. Lythand Veteran CPA Member

    Well in this case, the mother of runes, it would be attached. Mother only gets pro (color) when you tap her. Since she had summoning sickness it would be the next turn.

    And Tsi, just so you know, if an opponanat ever puts a negative enchantment on any creature, give it pro (color) of that enchantment and it removes it.

    Now in this instance, I am not sure, and I am not a judge, but I would say because of the creature is indesctrucable (sp?), it would stay in play.

    I just sent an email to a DCI judge. Ill let you all know what he says.
  12. Nightstalkers Creature — Nightstalker

    I was running the post under the assumption the creature already had pro-white effecting it (i.e. White Knight). In either instance it pretty much goes the same way because the Necromancy attaches itself as a resolution to the spell.


    I played four people who used Vampiric Tutor, I countered all four of the tutors, and they all tried arguing with me that it was part of the cost. *le sigh*
  13. Lythand Veteran CPA Member

    That what is part of the cost?
  14. Jigglypuff Big Cute Pink Thing

    Well, Vampiric Tutor was originally printed with the 2 life being part of the cost ("Pay 2 life: do some stuff"), similar to Sonic Burst, which was originally printed as "Discard a card at random: do some stuff". Then Wizards randomly decided to make Vampiric Tutor completely different. Why? Hey, pass the crackpipe.

    (- Steve -)
  15. orgg Administrator

    Actually, the Necromancy doesn't hit play simultaniously with the creature; it comes into play, brings the creature back, BECOMES an aura, and then ATTACHES to the creature. Pro: Black would prevent the Necromancy from attaching due to rule 212.4e's last line.

    It doesn't need to; if the Necromancy is never attached, there's no creature to destroy without regeneration. Take a look:
    If the Necromancy isn't attached, well, then there won't be an ENCHANTED creature, thus the ability does nothing.

    Correct. If you brought Darksteel Gargoyle into play with Necromancy, then disenchanted the Necromancy, the "destroy" effect would not do anything, and the Gargoyle would remain in play and not have the Necromancy attached to it anymore.

    And that's coming from a Level 1 Judge. :{ )
  16. EricBess Active Member

    Sorry Nightstalkers, orgg is right on this one.

    When Necromancy's trigger resolves, it "gains" ehchant creature, but can't be enchanting the creature because of pro:black, so it ends up an aura that isn't attached to anything. After it finishes resolving, it is put into the graveyard as a state-based effect because non-global auras need something to enchant.

    At this point, it says, "you're coming with me" to whatever it was enchanting...and guess what...that's nothing. It wasn't ever enchanting the creature, so the creature stays in play.

    And orgg, I'm pretty sure you could solve the problem by saying, "with Necromancy attached to it" because that gets around the targetting restriction. In that case, it would be more akin to what happens when a creature gains pro:black after Necromancy was already on it. The Necromancy would be put into the graveyard as a state-based effect, but this time, because it is an enchantment with an illegal target (a subtle, but important difference). Then, it would say, "I was enchanting you" and the creature would die.

    I'm not sure why they didn't errata it like that in the first place, but either they didn't realize the interaction at the time (in which case, you are probably correct about new errata), or they wanted to maintain the original wording and weren't worried about the new interaction. At the moment, it simply works well with pro:black.
  17. BigBlue Magic Jones

    yeah, but try explaining that in your play group - or to a judge who doesn't get it... :D
  18. Nightstalkers Creature — Nightstalker

    Then that lvl 4 judge at the tournament told me wrong... Okay... d*** cracker judges always giving me bad rulings.
  19. EricBess Active Member

    AFAIK, the change that made this possible was recent...
  20. orgg Administrator

    Aura has been out for a long while, now.

    People are just finding out about this bug because of Magic Online and some clever Richard.

Share This Page