Quirion Ranger

Colin Dewey

unread,

Apr 6, 1997, 4:00:00 AM4/6/97

to

May I return a forest to my hand with the Ranger and not have a tapped
creature to untap? Will the forest go back to my hand and the effect
fizzle?

Phaedrus

unread,

Apr 6, 1997, 4:00:00 AM4/6/97

to

The general answer to this sort of question would be "No." The targets
for a spell or effect have to be selected, and have to be legal, when the
spell or effect is announced. If you try to play a creature enchantment when
there are no creatures in play, for example, it doesn't fizzle--it can't be
announced at all. You can't use a spell or effect like this just to burn off
mana.
However, in the case of the Quirion Ranger, there's a difference.
"Return a forest you control to owner's hand: Untap target creature." It
doesn't say "Untap target tapped creature." There's absolutely nothing wrong
with using an "Untap target creature" effect on an untapped creature; it
will fail without accomplishing anything, but that's fine. So, with Quirion
Ranger, there's nearly always a legal target for the effect--Quirion Ranger
itself. So yes, you can return a forest to your hand with Quirion Ranger,
even if there's not a tapped creature available to untap.
--
\o\ If you're interested in books/stories with transformation themes, \o\
/o/ try <URL:http://www.halcyon.com/phaedrus/translist/translist.html>. /o/
\o\ New list entries always appreciated. FC1.21:FC(W/C)p6arw A- C->++ D>++ \o\
/o/ H+ M>+ P R T++++ W** Z+ Sm RLCT a cmn++++$ d e++ f+++ h- i++wf p-- sm# /o/

Christopher Hickman

unread,

Apr 7, 1997, 3:00:00 AM4/7/97

to

The ranger's text reads:

Return a forest you control to owner's hand: Untap target creature. Use
this ability only once each turn.

The target is a creature, which you must have to use the effect. The
Ranger himself will work if you need. The target need not be tapped,
else it would read "target tapped creature" in the effect.

--
Topher
<mailto:top...@techcom.net>

Marky Mark

unread,

Apr 7, 1997, 3:00:00 AM4/7/97

to

In article <334876...@poboxes.com>, Colin Dewey <TI...@poboxes.com> writes:
>May I return a forest to my hand with the Ranger and not have a tapped
>creature to untap? Will the forest go back to my hand and the effect
>fizzle?

Kes does not specify 'target tapped creature': you can target any untapped
creature (such as Kes hereself), Pay the cost (the Forest) and watch the
effect fizzle.

+Mark+

Phaedrus

unread,

Apr 7, 1997, 3:00:00 AM4/7/97

to

In article <5iaeu3$ft3$1...@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>,

This doesn't agree with my understanding of Magic terminology, so I'm
going to give my understanding so that someone can correct it. :-)
The effect doesn't fizzle. Fizzling is what happens when an effect has
no valid target. The effect does _fail_; failing is what happens when an
effect turns out to have no actual effect whatsoever (such as untapping an
untapped creature).
The difference? If all the targeted portions of an effect fizzle, the
untargeted portions automatically go away as well. In other words, let's say
that I had an effect "Untap target tapped creature. Gain 3 life." If I
used this effect on a creature (which would have to be tapped at the time I
announced it), and someone responded with Twiddle to untap the creature, the
"Untap target tapped creature" portion would fizzle (since the target is no
longer valid, since it's now untapped), and so the untargeted "Gain 3 life"
wouldn't happen either.
In contrast, if the effect was "Untap target creature. Gain 3 life.",
then even if the creature was untapped when the effect resolved, everything
would be fine; the "Untap target creature" would fail, but it wouldn't fizzle,
so the "Gain 3 life." would still happen.
And in contrast to the contrast, if the effect was "Untap target creature
to gain 3 life", and the target creature was already untapped, I wouldn't get
the life. If an effect is "Do X to do Y", with that magic word "to" in there,
then in order for Y to happen, X must _succeed_--not fizzle, not fail.
How far am I off on this?

Ingo Warnke

unread,

Apr 8, 1997, 3:00:00 AM4/8/97

to

Phaedrus (phae...@halcyon.com) wrote:
[correct interpretation of fail vs. fizzle snipped]

: And in contrast to the contrast, if the effect was "Untap target creature

: to gain 3 life", and the target creature was already untapped, I wouldn't get
: the life. If an effect is "Do X to do Y", with that magic word "to" in there,
: then in order for Y to happen, X must _succeed_--not fizzle, not fail.
: How far am I off on this?

The interpretation of 'Do X to do Y' changed at 6/1/96. From that time on,
all X is considered a cost to be done at announcement. This eliminates the
above rule for failing.

Ingo Warnke

Mike Marcelais

unread,

Apr 8, 1997, 3:00:00 AM4/8/97

to

> And in contrast to the contrast, if the effect was "Untap target
creature
> to gain 3 life", and the target creature was already untapped, I wouldn't
get
> the life. If an effect is "Do X to do Y", with that magic word "to" in
there,
> then in order for Y to happen, X must _succeed_--not fizzle, not fail.
> How far am I off on this?

Fairly close. The only mistake was the last bit. If something says "Do X to
do Y", then X is a cost. If you cannot do X, then you cannot announce the
effect at all.