MTG Magic The Gathering Ask A Judge - Tuesday Bluesday Edition

ded gaem

>>49075573
Have you been following the Ali Aintrazi bullshit? If so, what do you think about potentially changing some of the aspects of USC - Major to a DQ rather than a Match Loss plus asking the TO to remove the player?

Not trying to start a shitstorm or discuss the incident (it's over and done), but the above has come up in my regional judge group and I'm curious about your thoughts.

>>49076509
I think it's fine as it is. USC - Major is a Match Loss because it was awful to tell someone they might have to continue playing a match with the person who said shitty things to them, so by making it a Match Loss you just kinda end that match right there and remove it as a problem.

It CAN be upgraded, if the offending player doesn't immediately demonstrate remorse; that's basically just "if you want to continue to play today, you need to convince me this problem is not going to happen again". If the Judge sincerely thinks the player doesn't show any remorse, and feels that it's entirely possible they will create more problems, then an 'upgrade' to DQ is within the HJ's power. I think just making any USC - Major a snap DQ is a bit too heavy-handed; we have the avenue to remove a swinging dick if they're being a swinging dick, but we can use a lighter penalty for people who don't necessarily need to be thrown out on their ass.

HOWEVER- that's not what happened with the Ali case. Ali demonstrated remorse, and I highly doubt it would have been a problem going forward; that's outside the "DQ" option the HJ had. What happened is that the TO made the choice to bar Ali from the tournament hall for the day, which is 100% not an IPG, MTR, or Head Judge thing. That's a TO call, as it should be, and the Judge program has no documentation for that.

Does epic work on copies? I really want to make The Great Snake Mistake, but I just wanted to double check that they also got snakes.

>>49077453
Yep! Copies of a spell copy... well, most of it, but more importantly they copy the whole rules text of the spell.

Epic itself sets it up so that you copy the spell every upkeep EXCEPT for the "epic" part, so those copies don't have Epic (if they did it'd technically just keep making more Epic copies each turn!), but that's baked into Epic itself, not into the rules for copies. If you cast an Epic spell with Hivemind out, your opponents' copies will also have Epic, and if those copies resolve, they'll lock your opponents out of casting spells for the rest of the game.

>>49077564
Perfect, thanks. Do you have that decklist, by any chance?

>>49077663
I don't! I just know it involves Hive Mind and Endless Swarm. I think I saw people building Kaseto EDH decks with The Great Snake Mistake thrown in just for grins.

>>49077821
The U epic could be fun too.

Lunch bump.

Opponent has an upkeep trigger (If you have X do Y) on a creature. If I put an instant on the stack (lightning bolt) to kill the creature, does the creature's upkeep ability resolve if he still has X?

What happens if you restart a multiplayer game with Karn after someone has lost? My card shop has a commander tournament on Sundays that gives 'points' for knocking players out instead of just like who wins, so part of me wants to see if I can farm the newbies by dragging there asses back here.

>>49079315
You're going to be more specific. Usually triggers go on the stack and resolve independently from their sources.

>>49079359
*You've got

>>49079359
Dragon master outcast puts its trigger on the stack and then I put a electrickery on the stack. Do they still get a 5/5 dragon?

>>49079315
Well, it'd really help if you had a specific example.

Abilities on the stack exist independent of their sources. Blowing up, say, a Dark Confidant in response to the trigger isn't going to stop the trigger. There is a SLIGHT way around that: Intervening-if clauses.

Some triggers are worded as "WHEN/WHENEVER/AT [TRIGGER EVENT], if [CONDITION], [EFFECT]." There's a clause in the middle saying 'if this thing is true'; that clause is checked when the trigger goes to be put on the stack, and again as it goes to resolve. If it's not true both times, the trigger doesn't fire. An example would be Hanweir Militia Captain. If they have the Captain and exactly 3 other creatures, you can dome one of their creatures to force that transform trigger to whiff, because the condition won't be true as it goes to resolve.

>>49079355
Once a player hits a 'loss' condition in a multiplayer game, whether that be in the form of SBAs (0 life, milled out, Commander damage, etc) or just a flat "YOU LOSE" from the Nowhere Cannon, they are entirely removed from the game. They no longer exist within it. If you reset the game, it'll only reset it for the players currently inside the game (because it would suck if you had to sit and wait for the WHOLE game to finish, in case someone resets it)

>>49079414
Yes, because the trigger condition is "if you control 6 or more lands", not "if you control 6 or more lands and Dragonmaster Outcast". Once it's on the stack, it exists independent of the source, and the intervening-if clause is only checking to see if you have 6 or more lands.

If I put a Cheatyface on the board when my opponent looked away at a GP, as a joke. What would happen if the opponent turned out to be a dick?

>>49079771
At level best, I see you getting a stern lecture about "Yeah that's funny and all, but this is not the setting for that". I would not advise it.

Explain to me how Scroll Rack and Land Tax interact. Is there a best way to use them in conjunction?

>>49081464
What's the worst-case scenario?

>>49082531
>get three basic lands
>use scroll rack to put them on top of your library in exchange for 3 extra cards
Not sure what you aren't getting here.

>>49082636
Ah, fair enough.

>>49082615
I mean, possibly a DQ? It'd kinda have to ramp up to that, mostly with you being belligerent or causing issues. Just don't do it.

I have a slight, barely visible chip on the back of an expensive card at the corner of the letter "I". Is it still possible to play with a transparent sleeve?

>>49082816
It seems like if you were nice about it, the judge and everyone around would take your side, what's the real danger? Not the anon who asked, I'm honestly just confused about how it could become a real issue.

>>49082847
Not really. I wouldn't risk it.

>>49075573
new to magic. Explain tapping basics.

>>49082864
> what's the real danger?
Wasting people's time for a bad joke? Like, the best possible scenario here is that your opponent laughs a bit and you move on- cool. NBD. That's probably the most LIKELY thing, but it's also entirely possible that your opponent gets frustrated by your antics, or suspects that you might actually be using the Cheatyface as a diversion to ACTUALLY cheat, etc...

Yeah, it's a goofy joke. It's something I would laugh about with you if you were doing it at a casual Commander pod during a GP, and maybe even at a Regular REL event like a prerelease or an FNM. But at a GP, it's just a dumb joke at best, and an active waste of people's time at worst. Not worth it.

>>49082847
Personally I never recommend transparent sleeves unless you're putting every card directly into them as soon as they're opened. Even little bits of wear can get more visible than you'd think, and you might start to recognize the wear patterns. Play it safe.

>>49082914
Sure- most spells cost mana to cast. To get mana, you mostly use lands. There are five basic land subtypes: Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest. Any card that has one of those subtypes has the inherent ability to tap for the appropriate color of mana ( W U B R G, respectively). There's a fifth kind of basic called Wastes; they don't have a subtype, but can tap for Colorless mana because they have that ability.

Did you have a more specific question I could help with? The one you posed is pretty broad!

>Have Mikaeus, the Unhallowed
>Have Serra Avatar
>Serra Avatar dies
>????

Does Serra Avatar get shuffled into deck or does undying put it back into the field?

>>49084367
Depends on how you stack your triggers, whichever you put in the stack last resolves first. Basically you can choose which effect to activate.

>>49084367
Either one, depending on which you want! Undying and Serra's "Shuffle me back" trigger both fire from it dying. They're also both your triggers, so you choose the order they go on the stack; whichever goes on the stack LAST resolves FIRST. So you can either get it to come back with a +1/+1 counter, or shuffle it into your library; whichever one happens, it'll make the other trigger do nothing.

>>49085679
what if it's serra avatar and my opponents grave betrayal?

>>49086119
Depends on whose turn it is. In the previous scenario, you got to stack the triggers because both were yours; in THIS scenario, the Active Player puts their triggers on the stack, and then the NAP does the same, so NAP's trigger always resolves first.

If Avatar dies on your turn, your opponent will get it back because their trigger resolves first. If it dies on THEIR turn, your trigger resolves first and shuffles it away safely.

>>49086254
Thank you. One last question in this vein: what if it's my opponent's kalitas and my own samurai of the pale curtain and my runeclaw bear gets murdered on my turn. Does my opponent get a zombie? also if it matters what would happen if it was my opponent's turn?

>>49086361
With that, you have two competing replacement effects that both want to replace the same event with something else. In this case it doesn't matter whose turn it is; as the owner/controller of the affected object (the Runeclaw Bear that's dying), YOU get to select which replacement effect to apply first. If you apply Samurai's effect, then Kalitas' effect can't apply because there's no relevant event to replace, and your opponent gets no zombie. It's also legal for you to feed the Bear to Kalitas to give your opponent a Zombie, if you so chose.

>>49086447
thanks man it always pays off to visit these threads

File: 1437531305820.png (109KB, 400x419px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 400x419px

Will Umezawa's Jitte ever find its way off the banned list & why was this card banned in the first place?

>>49087252
It's too OP

>>49087252
Probably not, and the lack of the words "to a player".

>>49088090
BEDTIME

could i cast fling after the combat damage step to effectively double that damage?

>>49089457
As long as the creature is not dead by combat damage, yes.

File: Image[1].jpg (28KB, 223x310px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 223x310px

Can I include this card in a mono-white EDH/Commander deck?

>>49089979
yes you can

File: Image[1].png (123KB, 223x311px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 223x311px

>>49090017
Even with the white/black extort ability cost? Neat. My buddy always said you can't do that, like with pic related

>>49090040
The difference is
Cranial Plating have BB as an ability payment, it's color identity is B.
Extort cards have Extort, reminder text is not a color identity.

>>49089457
Assuming the creature lives through combat.

>>49089979
Yes. Reminder text has no rules meaning.

>>49090040
With Plating, the black mana symbols are present in the actual rules text, giving it a Black color identity. With Extort, the hybrid symbol doesn't actually exist inside the card's rules text.

If my opponent casts Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger and I cast Desertion in response, its cast trigger would resolve after Desertion, correct?

If that is the case, am I allowed to let the cast trigger resolve, then cast Desertion?

>>49092987
Correct; assuming you don't say otherwise, you'd be using Desertion with the on-cast trigger still on the stack. That said, by the time you can cast Desertion they've already chosen targets. And yes, you can let their trigger resolve and then cast Desertion.

I feel like you've answered this before, but I forgot your response (if any) so I'll just ask again; rancor + twisted image on a 1/1 basically just means the affected creature gets +2/+2 that turn, right?

Thanks in advance.

>>49093496
+0/+2, actually. Rancor applies in layer 7c, and Twisted Image applies after that, in 7e. You start by giving the creature +2/+0, making it a 3/1, and then you swap the P/T, making it a 1/3.

>>49093101
What's the most bullshit combo you've seen someone pull off in a tournament?

>>49094319
I personally like seeing my friend playing Oops all spells.

>>49094319
I guess that would depend on your definition of 'bullshit'.

File: Slowpoke.jpg (58KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 1920x1080px

>>49075573
gA, when did you get back? It's good to see you.

File: vexing.png (396KB, 446x622px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 446x622px

Hey gA, cheers for always helping. I got into mtg about a month ago with my gf. We played a game last night and I had a question

She ressed Vexing Scuttler from her gy with Rise from the Grave (ressed straight to battlefield). The scuttler lets her pull a sorcery/instant from her gy, but can she pull out the rftg she just cast, or has is it technically not discarded yet because it's still casting the scuttler?

Thanks!!

>>49094554
I technically never really left, I just made the threads a little less often because real life made it difficult to find the time.

>>49094653
Vexing Scuttler triggers when you cast it.

She did not cast it, she put it directly onto the battlefield with Rise from the Grave, so it never triggered at all.

Now, let's say she hit an Archaeomancer instead, since that triggers on ETB. That trigger needs a target the second it goes on the stack... but it doesn't go on the stack until Rise is done resolving. By the time the trigger needs a target, Rise has fully resolved and is in the gravyeard. It's not 'discarded' because that word means something very specific.

>>49094684
oh fuck, thats a game changer. We're still getting our heads around the specific wordings of the rules, I guess

Can you explain casting more clearly to me? Casting applies only from your hand to the stack or something?

What you said about archaeomancer makes sense, though. thanks man

>>49094759
To cast a spell is to move it from some zone that is NOT the stack (typically the hand, but sometimes the graveyard or library, and rarely exile), ONTO the stack, and go through various steps such that it becomes a cast spell waiting on the stack to resolve. It's not common for the effect of a spell or ability to have you cast something during it, but it'll be very explicit about it (for example, Epic Experiment clearly tells you to cast the spells it finds). If a spell like Rise from the Grave is just putting something directly onto the battlefield, it's not being cast, because it's not even touching the stack. The Eldrazi have on-cast triggers rather than on-enter triggers because of thematic-ness (all three of the original Eldrazi titans had on-cast triggers, for example) and to help make reanimation magic 'worse', for lack of a better term.

>>49094791
Ok, that makes more sense. Thanks again. I suppose understanding and visualising the stack is one of the harder parts of the game for beginners, along with wording specifics like you mentioned. But it's been tons of fun so far

I'll let her know she's a cheating scumbag

>>49094865
Hey, cheating requires intent!

>>49093496
Are you the one from the Modern thread that stated that Rancor combos with Twisted Image to give +2/+2, and when someone told you that didn't work, you told them to go read the rules?

I play Gravedigger with a bunch of creatures in my graveyard. Do i have to pick a target even if i don't want to use his ability?

>>49099013
It's a may ability, so you don't have to.

File: image.jpg (350KB, 750x519px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 750x519px

Would the creature tokens created by Blade of Selves fully activate Melee?

>>49099013
Yes. You select a target whether or not you're going to use the ability; the "may" part just says you can decide whether or not to bring that target back as it resolves.

>>49099178
Not quite.

>>49099284
Trigger, not activate. And no! The tokens were never actually declared as attackers, so they didn't 'attack' anyone. They won't turn Melee on.

>>49099284
No, they never attacked, they enter the battlefield already attacking.

>>49099378
>Not quite.
learned something new everyday.

>>49099408
Yep!

603.5. Some triggered abilities' effects are optional (they contain "may," as in "At the beginning of your upkeep, you may draw a card"). These abilities go on the stack when they trigger, regardless of whether their controller intends to exercise the ability's option or not. The choice is made when the ability resolves. Likewise, triggered abilities that have an effect "unless" something is true or a player chooses to do something will go on the stack normally; the "unless" part of the ability is dealt with when the ability resolves.

>>49099378
>>49099454
What if i have no creatures in my graveyard, and so no legal targets for the ability. Would it still go on the stack and get coutered before resolution like targeted spells do?

>>49099495
The ability triggers, goes onto the stack, and wants a target. Since there are no legal choices for you to make as far as targets go, the ability is simply removed from the stack. That's only if there's no targets to START with- if you pick a target and then your opponent makes it illegal (feeding it to a Scavenging Ooze, for example), the trigger isn't just instantly removed from the stack. It'll sit there, waiting to resolve, and then be countered by the rules of the game for having no legal target as it tries to resolve.

Generally when we play casually we let people take back shit like a spell they play and reap their lands.

However in a more competitive scene when is it "too late" to take back a spell, ability, or land tap. Assuming that they are all legal and have legal targets.

For example in a competitive scene, Bob cast terminate targeting Jims grizzly bear. In repose Jim cast mending touch targeting the grizzly bears, announcing the spell and tapping lands, only to realize it won't be regenerated and he wants to take it back. What happens and how do you solve?

>>49099578
"Haha that sucks man"

There's a bit of fudging room, but pretty much as soon as you've announced the spell that you can legally cast, I'm not letting you take it back because you realized it's a misplay. Go "In response, I'm going to cast Mending... hang on, that won't actually save it. Nevermind, resolves"? Probably won't have a problem with that, and neither will your opponent. "Response, Mending Touch." Beat. "Oh shit, can't be regenerated-" Yeah no, you done goofed.

Basically you don't get to "Take back" legal actions just because they're stupid.

>>49099378
>>49099393

Damn, that's a bummer. That's the only reason I picked her from the draft. Oh well.

>>49099615
Lands follow suit too correct?

Announces spell or ability, put on stack and pay it's cost. Seems like there is even more room to fudge around here

>>49099798
What, like someone playing the wrong land? That's pretty much a judgement call- if it's a simple dexterity error that they catch quickly, and I don't think they're trying to bait their opponent for information or a response, I'll just wave it away and ask them to be more careful.

If you mean something like tapping wrong (like they tap a Sacred Foundry instead of a Plains to cast a Path, and realize they need to leave up the red mana for a Bolt)... kinda the same thing. If I honestly think it was a brain fart and they catch the error quickly (like, as part of actually casting it quickly), I'll not really pay it much mind. But if I think enough time has passed that they just made a misplay, realized it, and are wanting to backtrack... nah.

A lot of this stuff is "had to be there" judgement calls, unfortunately.

What happens when a player tries to get a creature from Oath of Druids while Containment Priest and Grafdigger's Cage are on the battlefield?

>>49099875
It can't even attempt to enter the battlefield, so Preist's replacement effect doesn't apply. The creature just stays put.

>>49099875
It's perfectly legal for them to reveal cards from their library until they hit a creature card, at which point they stop. What happens next depends on the setup of the board- if you're asking what happens with BOTH those on the field, they won't be able to even begin to put the creature on the field, so Priest's replacement effect can't apply to it. They'll put the other revealed cards in their graveyard, and the revealed creature will be the new top card of their library. Ditto if it's JUST Cage.

If it's JUST priest, they'll wheel til they hit a creature, exile it, then put the other cards in their graveyard. Assuming they elect to use the Oath, that is- they can just NOT use the trigger.

I think I know the ruling for this, but I wanted to double check
So I have a divinity of pride and 23 life. My opponent swings at me with a 3/3 double strike and I block. What happens? This came up in cube the other day

>>49100070
Your Divinity is dealt 3 damage. It is now a 4/4 with 3 damage marked on it.

Then, it takes another 3 damage, deals 4 back, and gains you 4 life simultaneously. You go up to 27 life, and it immediately gets swole to the tune of +4/+4. By the time SBAs are checked post-damage, it is an 8/8 with 6 damage marked on it, which means it is not dead.

>>49099924
>>49099957
Can you provide more technical details for the case of both on the battlefield? I'm trying to find the exact rules for this situation. It showed up in the VSL finals. The creature card was exiled, which seemed wrong to me.
https://youtu.be/sCshscVhHZg?t=41m28s

>>49100162
Yeah, my guess is that they were treating Cage as a replacement effect, in which case it's possible to apply the Priest's effect first and exile the card.

That said... well, that's not what happens. Grafdigger's Cage doesn't have a replacement effect that replaces "put onto field" with "not put onto field", it just creates a new 'rule', basically. It says "That can't happen." It's like the interaction between Omen Machine and draw replacements; you can't even START to draw a card, so there's no draw event for the replacement effect to replace.

>>49100096
That's what I thought, but it seemed almost too weird to be true. Thanks!
SBA are counterintuitive sometimes

>>49100162
>>49100439
Also worth noting, MTGO is buggy as shit. For a while Containment Priest would exile ITSELF if you cheated it out with something like Vial, and shortly after they 'fixed' that, it didn't work at all.

>>49100440
Just remember that SBAs are checked right before anyone gets priority EVERY time someone gets priority... and never at any other time.

>>49100096
Can we get even stranger with it? What if the 3/3 double strike has trample. Does it matter if my life is 21, 23 or 24 does it change what happens?

>>49100703
>23 life
Your dude takes 3. Then, your opponent assigns 1 damage to it, and can assign 2 more to trample over to you, since it's a 4/4 with 3 damage already marked on it. You'll take 2 damage and gain 4 life, putting you at 25, with an end result of "your guy is not dead".

If you were at 22 or lower, you'd end up at 24 (or lower!) from the 'net' gain of 2 life, which would keep your Divinity offline and kill it.

DRIVING HOME.

>>49100875
Thanks again. Don't text and drive! ;P

File: images (1).jpg (2KB, 70x99px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 70x99px

>>49075573
what happens if i swerve a remand, and chose swerve as the new target?

File: Image (7).jpg (31KB, 223x310px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 223x310px

>>49101629
mb thumbnail

>>49101629
>>49101642
Swerve would resolve, changing the target of Remand to Swerve. Then, it would go to the graveyard because it's done resolving.

Then Remand would go to resolve and fizzle because it has no legal target.

>>49101821
hahahaha allright cool
thanks babe

File: saheelisartistry.jpg (52KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 265x370px

>copy a 10/10 creature
>it is now an artifact
can i copy the copy I just made? making 2 creatures?

>>49102502

no

learn to fucking play man

>>49102502
No. You select all your targets at once, when casting the spell, and you don't have the artifact token copy yet at that time.

>>49102547
dont be an asshole faggot

dear judge goy,

n00b anon here. i have a fuckton of MtG cards, but a) haven't ever played b) don't really know the rules.
can you give me the basics?
From,
N00b Anon

>>49105431
Well, "the basics" is something that's best done with another actual PLAYER, rather than me just giving you a block of text. That said, you might try the Magic Duels game on Steam (it's free, and teaches you the basics quite well), or give the Basic Rulebook a read

>>49105491
where can i find the rulebook

>>49105510
http://media.wizards.com/2014/docs/EN_M15_QckStrtBklt_LR_Crop.pdf

>>49105533
thnx m80

If the monarch has 3 life, and I connect with a 3/3, do I become the monarch? Or is the trigger exiled on the stack since the monarch lost the game? Who controls the 'become the monarch' trigger?

>>49106202
The trigger never fires, because the player who would control it leaves the game.

However, when the Monarch leaves a multiplayer game, the Active Player becomes Monarch (assuming the Monarch didn't die during their turn, in which case it just passes to the next player in turn order). Since you attacked, that'd be you.

>>49106269
Okay, cool. I probably should have checked the official rules before asking you. Thanks gA.

>>49106800
Nah, I'm happy to help.

>>49106269
Thats actually very cool, I'm glad they thought about that.

File: Image.png (125KB, 223x311px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 223x311px

How does this interact with emrakul? It works right? Since it's the creatures dealing the damage.

>>49109690
you have to target emrakul
i think emrakul cant be targeted
Protection from instants means that Emrakul can’t be the target of instant spells or activated or triggered abilities from instant cards, and damage that would be dealt to it by instant spells or cards is prevented. Instant spells may still affect it in other ways; for example, it would still receive the bonus from Borrowed Grace.

>>49075573
>opponent playing foreign cards
>ask what the card is
"i dont have to tell you"
>ask what the card does
"i dont have to tell you"

thats wrong correct?
if not how is the game fucking playable

>>49109798

Player information is a thing. So yes he has to inform you what it does. If you want to be a stickler you could make him recite the exact text or call a judge.

Things like what a card does, players graveyards, how many cards in hand, all of that is information you can ask for.

>>49109798
What the fuck kind of assholes do you play with?

>>49109690
You're right that Emmy's protection doesn't stop the damage, because the spell isn't the source. Or you WOULD be right, if that spell could legally target her! Another part of protection from something is that the object can't be targeted by things it has protection from, which is why you can't Doom Blade a Nu-Mrakul.

>>49109798
The full name of any object in a public zone is free information. If you ask "What card is that?" they must answer fully and honestly.

They don't have to tell you what it DOES, but they do have to tell you the name, and then (depending on the event) you can either pull your phone out where your opponent can see it and pull up the Oracle text, or just call a Judge over and ask "Can I get the Oracle text for [CARD NAME]?"

Though technically at Regular REL events (the ones where you'd be allowed to use your phone) even the card's Oracle text is Free information, so if you ask "what does that do?" they have to answer fully and honestly. They can't give an incomplete but true answer (like saying "It's a 2/3" for Nighthawk and leaving out the flying and deathtouch), nor can they decline to answer.

What do you think about using Berserk as removal?

>>49112912
How?

>>49112953
It destroys the creature at EOT. This wasn't a rules question, just an opinion question/bump.

>>49112912
I mean, it's certainly an angle. It's dodgy as fuck in 1v1 because unless you have a blocker to sponge up the hit you're going to get clowned for your trouble, but sometimes you're more afraid of that creature staying alive than taking a double-wide hit from it.

In multiplayer it's just straight gas. "Oh yeah, you take twice as much as you thought (or lose your 'easy block' AND take damage), and also the other guy loses a creature."

>>49112972
Cool in multiplayer, but not good enough in a duel.

>>49113004
Alright gA, on this topic, what happens if someone flickers their Aetherling that I cast Beserk on?

>>49113091
As in they flicker it after Berserk resolved?

It's a new object. The delayed trigger looks for a creature that longer exists, shrugs, and gives up.

>>49113108
Hmm, not as spicy as I would have hoped. Out side of stifle effects, how can I get rid of that bastard, assuming my opponent has mana back?

>>49113153
Well, a Stifle or similar would counter the 'bring me back' trigger and leave it gone forever. You could also use a Containment Priest or a Hallowed Moonlight to slam it on the way back in. Humility will rob it of the ability to blink. Trickbind will counter their first attempt to blink it, and leave it unable to blink for the rest of the turn so you can kill it via other means.

What happens if you pay inkmoth nexus' creature cost more than once?

>>49113289
It becomes a 1/1 Blinkmoth artifact creature with flying and infect until end of turn.
If you played a pump spell between activations, it will go back to being a 1/1.

>>49113289
Not much, you just refresh the timestamps on it. 95% of the time that doesn't do anything, but it can 'override' something if you need (for example, if someone made it a 0/1 you could 'reset' it to 1/1, or if someone took away Flying from it you could give it back)

>>49113354
Incorrect. That'll only be true if your pump spell was setting it to a specific number, like using a Creeperhulk. If you activated Nexus, then hit it with Giant Growth, then activated Nexus again, it would still be a 4/4, not a 1/1.

>>49113379
Oops. Got pump spells and the ones that change base P/T confused.

>>49112912
Sometimes worth it to take 6 from a Delver if you're at a decent life total in exchange for never getting hit again. Or even 2, if they don't flip it.

>>49113500
Sure, but how often is your deck playing Berserk and deciding "I should use this to stop their 3/2" rather than "I should use this to kill my opponent rapidly"?

>>49113514
When your Legacy Stompy deck isn't hitting enough creatures in the Delver matchup.

>>49113514
When you're on Infect, have no threat, and need to not die to a Delver for long enough to find one and win.

It doesn't come up terribly often, but it does happen.