Pyrokinesis with 0 targets
Are K. Saxrud
as to whether or not announcing Pyrokinesis with 0 targets would
violate rule 409.1e or not since you wouldn't be able to actually
divide anything. If Dave (or others) could shed some light on this
issue that would be nice :)
Pyrokinesis
{4}{R}{R}
Instant
You may remove a red card in your hand from the game rather than pay
Pyrokinesis's mana cost.
Pyrokinesis deals 4 damage divided as you choose among any number of
target creatures.
409.1e If the spell or ability requires the player to divide an effect
(such as damage or counters) among a number of targets, the player
announces the division. Each of these targets must receive at least
one of whatever is being divided (for example, damage or counters).
Daniel W. Johnson
> In a recent thread on the Wizards MTG message boards, discussion arose
> as to whether or not announcing Pyrokinesis with 0 targets would
> violate rule 409.1e or not since you wouldn't be able to actually
> divide anything. If Dave (or others) could shed some light on this
> issue that would be nice :)
That looks like as much of a violation as attempting to play Pyrokinesis
with 5 targets.
David DeLaney
>In a recent thread on the Wizards MTG message boards, discussion arose
>as to whether or not announcing Pyrokinesis with 0 targets would
>violate rule 409.1e or not since you wouldn't be able to actually
>divide anything. If Dave (or others) could shed some light on this
>issue that would be nice :)
>
>Pyrokinesis
>{4}{R}{R}
>Instant
>You may remove a red card in your hand from the game rather than pay
>Pyrokinesis's mana cost.
>Pyrokinesis deals 4 damage divided as you choose among any number of
>target creatures.
You can't choose 0 targets; you may choose 1, 2, 3, or 4. If you choose 1,
all four damage goes to it; if you choose 4, each target gets 1 damage;
if you choose 3 you MUST divide it 1, 1, and 2; and if you choose 2 targets
you have a choice of 1-3 or 2-2.
>409.1e If the spell or ability requires the player to divide an effect
>(such as damage or counters) among a number of targets, the player
>announces the division. Each of these targets must receive at least
>one of whatever is being divided (for example, damage or counters).
The "divided as you choose between any number of targets" cards can have
any number of targets from 1 to N, where N is the number of things
being divided. The only way to choose 0 targets for one of them is to
be dividing 0 things in the first place, which some of them can do, but
not Pyrokinesis.
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Simon White
Isn't this legal, as long as you allocate zero damage to at lest one
of them?
--
Simon White
Department of Electronics and Computer Science
Faculty of Engineering
University of Southampton
Simon White
<smw...@ecs.soton.nospam.ac.uk> wrote:
>Isn't this legal, as long as you allocate zero damage to at lest one
>of them?
Forget it, just seen DDls post
:-)
Daniel W. Johnson
> Isn't this legal, as long as you allocate zero damage to at lest one
> of them?
409.1e If the spell or ability requires the player to divide an effect
Andy Jakcsy
Johnson) wrote:
>Are K. Saxrud <asa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> In a recent thread on the Wizards MTG message boards, discussion arose
>> as to whether or not announcing Pyrokinesis with 0 targets would
>> violate rule 409.1e or not since you wouldn't be able to actually
>> divide anything. If Dave (or others) could shed some light on this
>> issue that would be nice :)
>
>That looks like as much of a violation as attempting to play Pyrokinesis
>with 5 targets.
Isn't this legal, as long as you allocate zero damage to at lest one
of them?
>>
No. A creature getting dealt 0 damage doesn't trigger abilities that trigger
off damage being dealt. So, why should those abilities that trigger off of
something being targeted trigger if nothing happens to the target? Thus the
rule about every target of a "distribution" effect must get at least one of
whatever's being distributed.
----
Most of the American people support George W. Bush. Most of the American people
also
watched Joe Millionaire. You sure you wanna trust the majority?
Yes, I respond to Scally, even though he/she/it PLONKed me. So sue me!
David DeLaney
>pano...@iquest.net (Daniel W. Johnson) wrote:
>>That looks like as much of a violation as attempting to play Pyrokinesis
>>with 5 targets.
>
>Isn't this legal, as long as you allocate zero damage to at lest one
>of them?
409.1e says, definitively, "no".
David DeLaney
>In a recent thread on the Wizards MTG message boards, discussion arose
>as to whether or not announcing Pyrokinesis with 0 targets would
>violate rule 409.1e or not since you wouldn't be able to actually
>divide anything. If Dave (or others) could shed some light on this
>issue that would be nice :)
Can't announce it with 0 targets, since it's dividing more than 0 "stuff".
For the spells/abilities that say "divided as you choose among any number
of targets", or the like, there are two cases:
1) you have zero "stuff" to divide. In effect, in this case you must
choose 0 targets. If you choose more, you get into trouble in 409.1e
because you can't divide at least one 'stuff' onto each target.
2) you have N "stuff" to divide, N>0. In this case you may choose anywhere
from 1 to N targets. You can't choose more without getting into trouble in
409.1e, again for being unable to divide at least one 'stuff' onto each
target; you can't choose 0, because there is no way to assign N "stuff"
to no targets. _Effectively_ this limits how many targets you can choose
back in 409.1c, though choosing the wrong number doesn't get you in trouble,
nitpickingly, until 409.1e ...
Pyrokinesis, and Pyrotechnics, each have 4 damage to divide... so you must
choose between 1 and 4 targets in 409.1c, or you'll get 'stuck' in 409.1e
when you try to divide the damage among the targets.
David DeLaney
>pano...@iquest.net (Daniel W. Johnson) wrote:
>>Are K. Saxrud <asa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> In a recent thread on the Wizards MTG message boards, discussion arose
>>> as to whether or not announcing Pyrokinesis with 0 targets would
>>> violate rule 409.1e or not since you wouldn't be able to actually
>>> divide anything. If Dave (or others) could shed some light on this
>>> issue that would be nice :)
>>
>>That looks like as much of a violation as attempting to play Pyrokinesis
>>with 5 targets.
>
>Isn't this legal, as long as you allocate zero damage to at lest one
>of them?
Nope; you're not allowed to "divide" zero 'stuff' onto one target when dividing
stuff in 409.1e . The practical upshot of this is you can't choose more targets
than you have stuff to divide without having to rewind the announcement and
start over again, so in practice you're limited to 1-to-4 targets for
Pyrokinesis or Pyrotechnics.
(The question originally arose with regards to Skulking Ghost vs things like
Contagion, and even back then the answer was "no, you can't just target the
Ghost and frighten it to death, without actually dividing something over
onto it".)