MTG: The Living Wall and Shatter/Disenchant
Brian Gregory Markenson
I think this may have been answered before, but I'm curious: how does
the regeneration on the Living Wall (Or on any artifact creature, for that
matter) affect Shatters and Disenchants? Can they be regenerated from one
of these spells? My inclination is to say that they can, but I'm not sure.
If they can for one and not the other, why...and where is that information
imparted?
Thanks...
-Brian Markenson
bri...@soda.berkeley.edu
Carl da Fuzz and Karen Silver Cravens
>the regeneration on the Living Wall (Or on any artifact creature, for that
>matter) affect Shatters and Disenchants? Can they be regenerated from one
>of these spells? My inclination is to say that they can, but I'm not sure.
other cards.
Disenchant (Instant) <1W>
Target enchantment or artifact must be discarded.
It doesn't say "destroy" or "kill"... it says "discarded." I would take this
to mean that the Wall _cannot_ regenerate from a Disenchant.
Shatter (Instant) <1R>
Shatter destroys target artifact.
Here it does say "destroys," so (barring conflicting official statements) the
wall _can_ regenerate from a Shatter.
da Fuzz
Lisa Richardson
> I think this may have been answered before, but I'm curious: how does
>the regeneration on the Living Wall (Or on any artifact creature, for that
>matter) affect Shatters and Disenchants? Can they be regenerated from one
>of these spells? My inclination is to say that they can, but I'm not sure.
>If they can for one and not the other, why...and where is that information
>imparted?
think you can regenerate from a shatter, since it says 'DESTROYS TARGET
ARTIFACT' but does not say anything about without regeneration. Now, for
Disenchant, you CANNOT regenerate, since it states 'Artifact is DISCARDED'.
Which means it loses it's ability that makes it an artifact. Regeneration
happens to be that very thing for the Living Wall.
--
Lisa Richardson (aka Priss on about a half dozen MUCKs)
pr...@glia.biostr.washington.edu and/or pr...@anime.tcp.com
"Live fast, Die young, and make hearts melt as you go away" - Lisa Richardson
Priss the MUF Wizard of _AnimeMUCK_ at anime.tcp.com (128.95.10.106) 2035
Brian Markenson
Carl \da Fuzz and Karen \Silver Cravens <DAF...@delphi.com> wrote:
>Brian Gregory Markenson <mys...@uclink.berkeley.edu> writes:
>
>>the regeneration on the Living Wall (Or on any artifact creature, for that
>>matter) affect Shatters and Disenchants? Can they be regenerated from one
>>of these spells? My inclination is to say that they can, but I'm not sure.
>
> Target enchantment or artifact must be discarded.
>
>It doesn't say "destroy" or "kill"... it says "discarded." I would take this
>to mean that the Wall _cannot_ regenerate from a Disenchant.
>
card from going to the graveyard? And when you discard a card,
doesn't it go to the graveyard? I mean, if something is disenchanted,
can't it still be returned to the game by a regrowth, or a raise dead
(assuming an artifact creature)...
What about using a Death Ward on an artifact creature? It's the
same question: why is disenchant so powerful?
Hmmm...again, I tend to think of discarding a card as putting it in
the graveyard, which is exactly what regeneration is supposed to be
able to prevent....
Thanks for any clarification.....
--
---------------
Brian Markenson
bri...@soda.Berkeley.EDU
Kimbo Beattie
> Thanks...
>-Brian Markenson
The Living Wall can regenerate from a Shatter, but not from a Disenchant.
--Kimbo
Lisa Richardson
> Still, though, isn't the definition of Regeneration to prevent a
>card from going to the graveyard? And when you discard a card,
>doesn't it go to the graveyard? I mean, if something is disenchanted,
>can't it still be returned to the game by a regrowth, or a raise dead
>(assuming an artifact creature)...
> What about using a Death Ward on an artifact creature? It's the
>same question: why is disenchant so powerful?
First off, as I mentioned on a previous reply... 'Disenchant removes the
ability of the artifact.' Much like stripping your calculator of its PC Board.
you can put together the pieces, but you can't replicate the PC Board if you
don't know how it works. Also, Disenchant is not that powerful. It is called
counterbalance. You can not expect to have the ultimate spell, artifact,
enchantment or creature, because in Magic, there is always a counter and the
counter sometimes ends up being very cheap. Look at the elemental blasts for
Blue and Red. Both destroys any Red or Blue card in play. That is a heck of a
lot stronger than a fireball or a lightning bolt, since it zaps enchantments,
spells or creatures that are Red or Blue. Terror is a common card that wipes
out any creature except artifact creatures and Black creatures. Heck, even
Raise Dead is a cheap card for black to bring a creature out of the graveyard.
> Hmmm...again, I tend to think of discarding a card as putting it in
>the graveyard, which is exactly what regeneration is supposed to be
>able to prevent....
Discarding is going to the graveyard, however, disenchant does not give you the
chance to regenerate a creature, since it is like removing the power to make it
special. Creatures have their own life, but Artifact Creatures are special.
Which is why you can SHATTER a fleshy wall, or make a statue become a creature
for a short amount of time.
Bill Seurer
From the rules:
Regeneration: Regeneration prevents a creature from going to the
graveyard. This ability must be used at the moment the creature would
normally be removed from play. Creatures that have already been
discarded into the graveyard cannot be regenerated. Enchantments on
a regenerated creature remain in play. When a creature is regenerated,
it is always tapped. A creature that is sacrificed may not be regenerated.
NOWHERE in that rules does it say "killed" or "destroyed". It says
"going to the graveyard" and "removed from play". In fact, it even
mentions "discarded".
From that it is pretty clear that no matter how the critter is removed from
play it can be regenerated. Except, of course, for all the ways to
remove critters that prevent regeneration. Like Disintegrate, Terror, etc.
--
- Bill Seurer Language and Compiler Development IBM Rochester, MN
Business: BillS...@vnet.ibm.com Home: BillS...@aol.com
Lisa Richardson
>From the rules:
> Regeneration: Regeneration prevents a creature from going to the
> graveyard. This ability must be used at the moment the creature would
> normally be removed from play. Creatures that have already been
> discarded into the graveyard cannot be regenerated. Enchantments on
> a regenerated creature remain in play. When a creature is regenerated,
> it is always tapped. A creature that is sacrificed may not be regenerated.
>NOWHERE in that rules does it say "killed" or "destroyed". It says
>"going to the graveyard" and "removed from play". In fact, it even
>mentions "discarded".
>From that it is pretty clear that no matter how the critter is removed from
>play it can be regenerated. Except, of course, for all the ways to
>remove critters that prevent regeneration. Like Disintegrate, Terror, etc.
Bzzt... Sorry, but you can't regenerate something that was animated by other
means. As I used an example before... Shatter is like taking apart a
calculator... You can put the pieces back together for it to work... But
Disenchant not only takes it apart, it steals the pc board that makes it work.
You can't put back something together and expect it to work without the key
item. Creatures that are not artifacts are naturally made. Infact, they are
summoned... Artifact Creatures are MADE by magic. To disenchant the artifact
undoes what magic you did to create the artifact. For the living wall, the
magic is what mkes it regenerate and act like a wonderful wall. Remove that
ability by disenchanting... You kill its cohesion.
Bill Seurer
|> Bzzt... Sorry, but you can't regenerate something that was animated by other
|> means. As I used an example before... Shatter is like taking apart a
|> calculator... You can put the pieces back together for it to work... But
|> Disenchant not only takes it apart, it steals the pc board that makes it work.
|> You can't put back something together and expect it to work without the key
|> item. Creatures that are not artifacts are naturally made. Infact, they are
|> summoned... Artifact Creatures are MADE by magic. To disenchant the artifact
|> undoes what magic you did to create the artifact. For the living wall, the
|> magic is what mkes it regenerate and act like a wonderful wall. Remove that
|> ability by disenchanting... You kill its cohesion.
Excuse me, but where are you getting all this garbage from? The disenchant
cards says, "Target enchantment or artifact must be discarded". Nothing
more.
You are assigning another level of meaning to the cards. I suppose you
don't let the Thicket Basilisk destroy the Bog Wraith either? After all,
how could you turn a non-corporeal thing into stone? And I bet you don't
let Ressurection work on Bog Wraiths either. Wraith aren't, after all,
alive. Or maybe you let them be ressurected as some other creature? And
I bet that you let the Frozen Shade fly (it *IS* flying in the picture
after all).
The pictures and names of things are just to add flavor to the game NOT
to override the text printed on them. "Disenchant" could just as well
have been called something else but with the exact same text. Would you
make the same argument then?
Jonathan Dean
>
>Bzzt... Sorry, but you can't regenerate something that was animated by other
>means. As I used an example before... Shatter is like taking apart a
>calculator... You can put the pieces back together for it to work... But
>Disenchant not only takes it apart, it steals the pc board that makes it work.
>You can't put back something together and expect it to work without the key
>item. Creatures that are not artifacts are naturally made. Infact, they are
>summoned... Artifact Creatures are MADE by magic. To disenchant the artifact
>undoes what magic you did to create the artifact. For the living wall, the
>magic is what mkes it regenerate and act like a wonderful wall. Remove that
>ability by disenchanting... You kill its cohesion.
>
NEVER, NEVER use the description, or name, of a card as a basis to
determine its abilities abilities. Otherwise you can run into
humorous, but pointless, arguements. A Grey Ogre would not be able to
attack vegetarian players... Fog would prevent a Basilisk from
stoning creatures. And the Zombie Master and Goblin King would grant
themselves special abilities.
Use only the rules portion of the card to determine what the card can
(or cannot) do. The name is only there to uniquely identify the card,
and the description (if any) is just filler.
BY THE RULES an arifact can regenerate from a Disenchant. However,
it has been handed down from above (Snark?) that a creature CANNOT
regenerate from being DISCARDED.
It is up to you to decided whether you want to go with the rules
(regenerate: yes) or with what is generally accepted (regenerate: no).
BTW, A Grey Ogre CAN attack a vegetarian.
Fog does NOT stop the Basilisk's gaze.
The Zombie Master does NOT have swampwalk and regeneration.
The Goblin King goes NOT have mountainwalk and the +1/+1.
--
Jonathan Dean
Paul Brinkley
deckmaster directory on marvin.macc.wisc.edu. Look at the
answers for December 9. I quote:
=====================================================================
>Last question: My opponent Shatters my Living Wall. Can I use it's
>Regenerate ability to save it?
You bet.
>We have an ongoing argument over whether something can be Regenerated if
>it's Destroyed (i.e. Creature Bond problem, etc.), or if Destroyed can not
>be helped. This is a very confusing issue when you've got lots of shatters,
>creature bonds, and regenerations running around.
Destroyed = Killed = may regenerate.
Discarded = removed from play = may not regenerate.
=====================================================================
End quote.
There ya go. Not because of any meanings read into card names, but
because of a (semi-official) ruling from WotC on the mechanics of
the word "discard".
So now there seems to be three ways to "remove" a card:
Destroy - killed due to damage dealt (Earthbind, another creature),
or just because (Siren's Call, Shatter). Destroy comes in two
flavors: can be regenerated (Shatter), or cannot be (Terror).
Card is placed in the discard pile/graveyard.
Discard - simply removed from play, and placed in the graveyard.
Pertains to all sorts of cards, not just creatures. If it is
a creature, it can't be regenerated. Includes Balance,
Disenchant, Lich, etc., though Disenchant seems to be the only
card that does not also say "and cannot be regenerated".
Nuked, Discombobulated, It's Outta There - due to Disintegrate or
Swords to Plowshares. Not even put into the graveyard. (We
usually just make a second "graveyard" out to the side for such
unlucky critters...)
Thus, it would seem to me that if I had a Living Wall with two
Creature Bonds on it, and my opponent were to cast Tunnel on it, I
could respond by casting Disenchant at the same instant, and, after
resolving the obvious paradox, avoid taking 12 (Gulp!) points of
damage. (Whew!)
Is this right?
Paul Brinkley
brin...@cs.utexas.edu
("Hey! We just found a whole new load of paradoxes!")
Charles J Poirier
Bill Seurer <BillS...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>In article <2flcq7$e...@agate.berkeley.edu>, bri...@soda.berkeley.edu (Brian Markenson) writes:
>|> >Disenchant (Instant) <1W>
>|> > Target enchantment or artifact must be discarded.
>|> ...I tend to think of discarding a card as putting it in
>|> the graveyard, which is exactly what regeneration is supposed to be
>|> able to prevent....
>From the rules:
> Regeneration: Regeneration prevents a creature from going to the
> graveyard. This ability must be used at the moment the creature would
> normally be removed from play. Creatures that have already been
^^^^^^^
> discarded into the graveyard cannot be regenerated....
^^^^^^^^^
>From that it is pretty clear that no matter how the critter is removed from
>play it can be regenerated. Except, of course, for all the ways to
>remove critters that prevent regeneration. Like Disintegrate, Terror, etc.
It still reads ambiguously to me. Is the accent on "already" or "discarded"?
If "already", the rule speaks of "being there" for a while; if accent is on
"discarded", it speaks of "going there". The latter case would require
"discarded" to mean something distinct from "killed" or "destroyed", I think.
Frankly the status of the term "discarded" is still up in the air so far as
I know. And rightly so, for a card discarded from the hand may well ought
to be treated differently from a card discarded from "in play".
Cheers, frowns, furrowed brows,
Charles Poirier c...@shell.portal.com
Lisa Richardson
>Excuse me, but where are you getting all this garbage from? The disenchant
>cards says, "Target enchantment or artifact must be discarded". Nothing
>more.
Fine... Pull out a WotC person to rule for this one. I have a few people who
agree on this context an I will ask a friend of mine who plays this game down
to the bare bones on the ruling. But as far as I can tell, you can't revamp an
artifact if it is disenchanted.
Jonathan Dean
>
>>Excuse me, but where are you getting all this garbage from? The disenchant
>>cards says, "Target enchantment or artifact must be discarded". Nothing
>>more.
>
>Fine... Pull out a WotC person to rule for this one. I have a few people who
>agree on this context an I will ask a friend of mine who plays this game down
>to the bare bones on the ruling. But as far as I can tell, you can't revamp
>an artifact if it is disenchanted.
>
Sorry, but you don't need a WotC person for this one. BY THE RULES a
creature may use the Regeneration ability to prevent it from going to
the graveyard (pg 27). A card that has been discarded goes to the
graveyard (pg 23). As there is no mention that being Discarded voids
Regeneration, a creature may Regnerate from being Discarded by the
rules. The rules are pretty clear on what happens (or at least as
clear as the rules get).
But, what you will hear from WotC (I believe) is that the rules are
WRONG in this situation. Snark has handed down that a creature MAY NOT
Regenerate from being Discarded. So they would probably support your
conclusion in this case.
Please note that they did go into the mechanics of how a Disenchant
actually works to reach this conclusion. It is only by sheer
coincidence that they agree with your technobabble. Your view of how
Disenchant works is NOT the same as mine, so what makes you say that
your view is better than mine?
There are enough arguments about Magic by using only the rules. Please
don't drag in the supposed mechanics of how cards work into the mess.
The name of a card, its picture and its description are there ONLY to
make the game visually pleasant.
--
Jonathan Dean
Scott Emery
In article <1993Dec27.1...@rchland.ibm.com>,
seu...@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Bill Seurer) writes:
:|> >Disenchant (Instant) <1W>
:|> > Target enchantment or artifact must be discarded.
:From the rules:
:
: Regeneration: Regeneration prevents a creature from
: going to the graveyard. This ability must be used at the
: moment the creature would normally be removed from play.
: Creatures that have already been discarded into the
: graveyard cannot be regenerated. Enchantments on
: a regenerated creature remain in play. When a creature
: is regenerated, it is always tapped. A creature that is
: sacrificed may not be regenerated.
:From that it is pretty clear that no matter how the critter is
:removed from play it can be regenerated. Except, of course,
:for all the ways to remove critters that prevent regeneration.
:Like Disintegrate, Terror, etc.
Nah. The card says you *must discard* the target artifact.
Ok, you discard it. Now you can't get it back because the
rules say "Creatures that have already been discarded cannot
be regenerated."
Yes, Regenerate does "prevent a creature from going to the
graveyard", but disenchant overrules.
From the rules: "If a card contradicts the rules, the card
takes precedence."
------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Emery | "I can't stand people who have no impatience!"
Sem...@tau.sim.es.com
Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp.
Salt Lake City, Utah
"I think, therefore my company doesn't claim my opinions."
------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Emery
In article <2fnhuv$b...@ozona.cs.utexas.edu>, brin...@cs.utexas.edu
(Paul Brinkley) writes:
:Well, to clear this up, take a look at snark.answers in the
:deckmaster directory on marvin.macc.wisc.edu. Look at the
:answers for December 9. I quote:
Thanks for showing me where these are archived.
:There ya go. Not because of any meanings read into card names, but
:because of a (semi-official) ruling from WotC on the mechanics of
:the word "discard".
Thanks also for pointing out that these "rulings" are still at the
"semi-official" stage. I'll believe that they're truly official
when they are printed and packaged with the cards themselves.
(not to discount the rulings themselves: I just believe that
they are an "in process" kind of thing still.)
:So now there seems to be three ways to "remove" a card:
:
:Destroy - killed due to damage dealt (Earthbind, another creature),
: or just because (Siren's Call, Shatter). Destroy comes in two
: flavors: can be regenerated (Shatter), or cannot be (Terror).
: Card is placed in the discard pile/graveyard.
:
:Discard - simply removed from play, and placed in the graveyard.
: Pertains to all sorts of cards, not just creatures. If it is
: a creature, it can't be regenerated. Includes Balance,
: Disenchant, Lich, etc., though Disenchant seems to be the only
: card that does not also say "and cannot be regenerated".
:
:Nuked, Discombobulated, It's Outta There - due to Disintegrate or
: Swords to Plowshares. Not even put into the graveyard. (We
: usually just make a second "graveyard" out to the side for such
: unlucky critters...)
:
:Thus, it would seem to me that if I had a Living Wall with two
:Creature Bonds on it, and my opponent were to cast Tunnel on it, I
:could respond by casting Disenchant at the same instant, and, after
:resolving the obvious paradox, avoid taking 12 (Gulp!) points of
:damage. (Whew!)
I believe you are correct. Nice move, btw. And an excellent
explanation of the Discard -vs- Destroy mechanics.
Carl da Fuzz and Karen Silver Cravens
>I believe you are correct. Nice move, btw. And an excellent
>explanation of the Discard -vs- Destroy mechanics.
playtest rules. The actual terms are...
Kill/Destroy - remains unchanged, they both mean the same thing.
Bury - Killed/Destroyed with no hope of regeneration.
Removed from game - just that, removed from game.
(Actually, I don't think they decided on these terms until after the last
playtest draft I saw, but they announced them as being a final decision on
the mailing list.)
Regeneration will be changed so that you can't regenerate from "discarding"
a card... only from Kill/Destroy.
da Fuzz