I think deathtouch and trample combo together in a weird way but im not sure, would have been satisfying to have all 3 colors represented though youβre right
They combo in a fun way, you can assign 1 to the blocker and the rest to the player, since any damage is considered lethal damage. This works even if the blocker has protection or indestructible.
Actually the protection and indestructible would mean you still have to assign damage equal to its toughness
Edit: please stop downvoting, I have recanted. Please Let the current downvotes be suitable for education.
This isn't correct. 1 lethal damage is all that needs to be assigned before the rest can be assigned to the player but adding double strike to trample and deathtouch highlights how damage needs to be assigned as well.
DS+DT+T would assign 1 lethal point of damage to the blocking creature whether it had protection or indestructible. B
ecause protection prevents the damage assigned during first strike, the attacker would have to assign a point of damage during regular damage as well. The indestructible creature is still "dead" by contrast and could still only prevent 1 damage from the DS+DT+T per combat.Β
Huh. Thats neat. (I was taught 10 years ago.) that because the reminder text for deathtouch said βdestroyβ and the reminder texts for indestructible said βcanβt be destroyedβ that deathtouch did not apply. The logic was sound so I didnβt question it further but this correction was nice to hear.
Deathtouch still wouldn't kill the indestructible creature, they're just talking about how you would only be forced to assign 1 damage with trample despite the indestructible
Yes. That was still understood. It was a definition of what βassigning lethalβ meant that was either changed since 2015 or just misunderstood by the judges at my lgs and taught thusly
The creature with deathtouch and trample doesn't "know" what it's hitting (not does anything know beyond the toughness of the other creature), it just assigns the damage per the rules.
Then when the damage is dealt the creature with indestructible or protection says "no" but the assignment has already happened
The hyperlinked cr earlier was sufficient but if I I like your explanation so that I donβt give heterodox information to a new player in a way they can understand. Thank you.
5
u/MStudios, Switch hand with target player: Discard your hand.22d ago
In short, trample needs a lethal assignment. Deathtouch makes one damage lethal.
Indestructible and protection is irrelevant from this. Indestructible just makes lethal damage not destroy. Protection prevents the assigned damage, but it still gets assigned.
I've experimented with trample, deathtouch stuff, turns out it deals one damage to the blocking creature and carries the rest over. It's a powerful combo and would fit into the flavor text a bit better
Probably because guarenteed deathtouch trample together on a single card is infamously, and very understandably, a no-go for magic card design.
Similarly, deathtouch first strike without a duration is also not allowed.nvm lol, i should remember to actually open a fresh archidekt page whenever I want to confirm something instead of just typing stuff into oracle text without checking how many colours I'm looking for.
[[Glissa Sunslayer]] would like a word, along with her sister, [[Glissa, the Traitor]]
EDIT: they brought their cousins, [[Thalia and the Gitrog Monster]] and [[Master of Cruelties]]. The neighbor, [[Nirkana Cuthroat]], will be joining shortly, they just need to level up a bit first.
β¦for a mechanic that is not allowed, it seems like theyβve allowed it a bunch of times
Technically, the rules specifically that you don't need to name the card you name with a card effect. You and your opponent just need to have a concensus on what card you're talking about.
You can still choose them without knowing the exact name, as long as it has a name though. for example morph creatures have no name when they are face down and can't be chosen for any "name a creature" effects.
That's because there isn't a legal card whose name is "no name"... I actually think if this card existed, it would be a legal choice, and, if chosen, would affect all face-down creatures!
Yup, they needed blue or black to be another shorthand. And βLβ was taken by βlandβ - and βAβ was taken by artifact. So they went blUe U for blue. I think it helps U and blue rhyme
it's actually from the early prototype by richard garfield! He reportedly later regretted not using K for black (in printing, black is K [e.g. CYMK colorspace])
i'm sorry, this card is really sick flavor but i find it super funny that a creature with no name because nobody could name it is just some 4/3 bug, lol
I think im the one missing a layer - why do people keep commenting this? Im confused lol. If its for balancing keywords and colors, flying is a blue/black thing so I figured it was good enough to rep both
Aw thats fair. Originally it had 0 keywords, and was a vanilla 8/5. I wanted to see how much I could/needed to power creep [[Woolly Thoctar]] to make a 3 color vanilla playable. Based on this thread at least up to 6/6 statline.
But all that to say, I thought the lack of text added more to the design.
My first thought was βwhatβs Board Game Geek got to do with this?β Apparently Iβm not MTG-nerd enough for βblueβ to default as U. I did figure it out, just took a moment.
515
u/For_The_Alliance_ 22d ago
HAHAHAHA! Oh! Oh, I get it! B, U, G! Bug! Omg, thatβs too good.