60 Rules Puzzles for Magic Judges & Inquisitive Players 

Not gonna lie, it was actually a good question.

Assuming no mulligan, the grief player has 3 cards left in hand (Grief, one exiled for evoke, one land, NDAA used) and a 3/2 menace while you have 5 left in hand and 2 discarded. It would depend on my hand and/or draw, but I think I'd scoop pretty fast

😂

I really thought that was the end of the sentence.

"you cast word of command" no i dont

The rule used to be that mana empties only between phases. That rule was updated in M10, I believe, where it empties between steps as well. People used to float mana from their upkeep to their draw steps from cards like Braid of Fire. If you look at the wording on Upwelling compared to its oracle text, you can see the differences.

@Daz1One well I started playing in m13 so at least for me it's always been the current way for me and I never noticed.

Yeah, according to the rules on the gatherer page for fireball it would get rid of both creatures

Yeah, according to the rules on the gatherer page for fireball it would get rid of both creatures

yep, just came down here to say this 😅

That is my criticism as well. A+ video otherwise

Same here. Even on computer, going back in time after each question gets annoying pretty quickly, I stopped watching after 10 questions or so just because of that.

im little confused at this part because it says spezific "During target opponent's next turn, creatures that player controls attack Gideon Jura if able." so if you copy the ability with Kraji shouldnt it says the same and the creators still have to Attack Gildeon Jura if able or is Copien the abilitie changeing this part of the ability ? 😵‍💫

@@10Pugz When a card refers to itself, the actual rules treat it as saying the cards name, whatever the card's name is. In this case, the ability would refer to Experiment Kraj, and it would change anytime you change the name of the permanent as well. For instance, if you activated a Tajic, Legion's Edge's ability, then someone manages to cast Witness Protection while it was still on the stack, the ability would automatically refer to Legitimate Business Person getting First Strike until end of turn when it resolves. Changing the name wouldn't fizzle the spell.

@@10Pugz cards will commonly be formatted as "During target opponent's next turn, creatures that player controls attack ~ if able." colloquially, where ~ means "this card", so when copied, the self-referential property of the effect will stay

Also, wouldn't Kraj get 2 loyalty counters (that don't really do anything)?

@@brofstPermanents keep all counters even if they aren't related to their type. Gideon keeps the +1/+1 counter (that does nothing when it's only a planeswalker) and Kraj keeps the loyalty counters (that you can use to activate any planeswalker ability Kraj copies (a permanent can only activate one loyalty ability per turn, even if t's not a planeswalker)), so on your next turn you can activate Gideon's +0 again (or turn it into a creature any other way) and Kraj will be able to use the -2 if there's a valid target. Because Kraj isn't a planeswalker, it doesn't die from losing all its loyalty counters.

nothing was wrong

Your pronunciation of "mana"

You actually scoop before they cast the not dead after all to avoid revealing information to your opponent.

In question 20 you’d have to return the call to serve if your opponent controlled a nonblack creature and would then draw two cards

In question 41, I believe the 2/2 morph should not become a copy of either other permanent. This is because it is a face-down permanent, which means that in layer 1b, after applying copy effects, its characteristics are modified according to rule 708.2, which says: Face-down spells and face-down permanents have no characteristics other than those listed by the ability or rules that allowed the spell or permanent to be face down. Any listed characteristics are the copiable values of that object's characteristics. EDIT: Note that turning the morphed creature face up after casting Mirrorweave *will* turn it into a copy of whatever Mirrorweave targeted. The effect still applies, and will no longer be overrided by anything in layer 1b.

i like how some questions have an explanation with them, and that one the answer was just, "yup"

Weirdly the only source I can find for this ruling is specific oracle rulings on various cards (e.g. solemnity) It seems like something that should be explicitly in the rules themselves for infect/wither. It uses lifelink as an example but there's no ruling around deathtouch. So you might be right, but I can't find a citation on it. "Damage from a source with infect has no effect on creatures or players. No -1/-1 counters are put on creatures, and no damage is marked on them. Players don't get poison counters and they don't lose life. The damage is still dealt for purposes of effects that care about damage, such as lifelink." From my less trained perspective it seems like damage was prevented because it was prevented from being marked, but solemnity specifically has the ruling that the damage did occur.

@@dulloddity Yeah, I also noticed that none of the examples use deathtouch. Regardless, you can still infer that it works this way. The key point here is that the damage is not actually _prevented_ (since neither Melira nor Solemnity actually use the word “prevent”). The regular _effects_ of the damage are replaced (by nothing), but the damage _itself_ isn’t, so it still happens as normal (as the segment you quoted says). So there’s no marked damage or counters placed, but there _is_ still “invisible” damage dealt, which matters in the case that something cares about that, as is the case here. Yes, I know this is a confusing and unintuitive interaction, but then again, that’s what the entire video is about. And to prove deathtouch is relevant here, the rules definition for it - specifically rule 702.2b (and 704.5h) - states “A creature with toughness greater than 0 that’s been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked is destroyed as a state-based action.” You’ll note that nowhere does that mention anything about _marked_ damage, -1/-1 counters, or the like - only that damage was dealt in the first place. So since the Mutavault _does_ deal its damage, deathtouch _does_ still kill the blocker.

I tried my best: using my own knowledge, double-checking the comp rules, gatherer, and Googling judge answers, but I knew going in I was going to get some of these wrong.

@@AmmiO2 Sorry I should've made it a bit more clear, these weren't criticisms, a lot of these I only knew from seeing the question before, this all being basically correct without being a judge is quite the accomplishment. Even as a judge I'd expect a couple mistakes. I was just trying to give some constructive feedback.

It's sipply a phyiscal thing. Keep the cards you have before brainstorm in your left hand and the ones you brainstorm and sylvan library in your right. As soon as they touch each other you can longer proove that you drew that specific card so they aren't legal to put back with libraries effect.

@@zuterwer1835 Huh. I guess to be fair you have to be able to show that somehow without revealing them. Thought I was missing something.

Unfortunately, 605.3c stops this: 605.3c Once a player begins to activate a mana ability, that ability can’t be activated again until it has resolved.

I was thinking of this as well, but I suppose something has changed since I last checked. I used to love the old puzzle, when Elf and Altar were used to cast a Lightning Helix

Haakon checks whether it's legal when it's put on the stack. When it is, Grid Monitor is the top card. Grave Troll has 2 states of being: The 1st is in the graveyard, and the 2nd is on the battlefield. There is no point at which it's "in-between" the 2 zones. So "as" it enters, it checks how many creatures are in the graveyard and includes itself. It's then on the battlefield.

GGT isn't being cast, it's being moved from GY to battlefield, so its still "in the graveyard" as it's entering whenever you cast a spell, you technically move it from where it's being cast from (in Haakon's case, the GY, changing what's on top) to the stack

Was wondering this myself. It feels like the time stamp order was applied backwards in the answer, but I'm not expert on dependencies, so I'm not sure.

You are correct. With Life and Limb having the earlier timestamp, the Forest should be a Basic Creature Land - Brushwagg Forest and the Saproling should be a Creature Land - Brushwagg Forest.

I was thinking the same thing. I figured the interaction would work like Archon of Coronation, where the damage happens but its normal effects do not.

You assign damage, but there is 0 damage marked on the creature.

⁠@@AmmiO2. Sure, but that isn’t what matters. What matters is that Inkmoth Nexus did deal damage to the blocker, since that is what the deathtouch SBA checks for. And even if no results of the damage (losing life, marking damage, placing counters) happened the damage was still dealt, see Platinum Emperion vs commander damage for another example. 704.5h. If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and it's been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked, that creature is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.

Creatures with infect or wither never mark damage on creatures, but they still work with deathtouch. If the damage isn't prevented then SBAs will see that a source with deathtouch damaged a creature and put that creature in the graveyard accordingly.

If the lifelink gains you a life, the Deathtouch kills the creature for the exact same reason. @@AmmiO2

If an infinite loop of actions begins that cannot be stopped then the game ends in a draw. There are a few examples of this, such as a loop of Worldgorger Dragon repeatedly entering and exiting exile and flickering your stuff infinitely. You can’t manually stop it from happening without some other effect like a removal spell; if neither you nor your opponent has a way to stop the loop the game is a stalemate. As for a loop you manually choose to do over and over, that I believe is slow play since you can choose to stop the loop on your own terms. Moral of the story…keep Shararazaad on the ban list

A halfway decent Karn Mycosynth deck would run a wincon as well. People just scoop when Karn Mycosynth hits the board because they know they won't be able to stop the wincon that's coming somewhere in the next few turns.

@@Felixr2”the next few turns” as in the 6/6 Lattice that’s going to be attacking

@@ZakanaHachihaCBC For example.

How are your contradictory instants resolving at the same time? For the "we both have a platinum angel but no cards in hand or deck" game, the game will be considered a draw when the round comes to time.

Wouldn't you assign 0 damage to both in the divide/distribute step of casting the spell tho? I think 15 was right. The melira one was wrong tho

@@MehrGills Fireball’s distribution is applied as it resolves, not in the step of dividing when you cast a spell because you don’t choose how to divide the damage. It’s done automatically when it goes to deal damage. Meaning it’s only seeing 1 target so it deals 1 damage. The Meleria one is also wrong from using bad terminology. The Inkmoth is still dealing damage, it just doesn’t mark the damage as a -1/-1 counter. You gain 1 life from lifelink and the Kira will die to Deathtouch.

@@ZakanaHachihaCBC ah, reading the scryfall/gatherer rulings explains the card. My bad, I should have checked there too not just CR

@@MehrGills it’s all good. Normally gatherer isn’t the best place to go to for definitive rulings, but basically to give an in-rules explanation for why it’s because you’re not choosing how to divide the damage Fireball will ultimately deal, it does that on its own. This is because Fireball is able to target more creatures then what X equals so we can’t actually choose how to divide the damage.

The part that really confused me was the scarab god interaction. It really throws me off that it actually just loses its ability entirely when it has its p/t set by the token effect. Like I understand the ability no longer works because of the token creating effect setting the p/t but I would have assumed it would still technically have an ability.

@@Red-Tower think about it this way: goyf looks like it has an ability that sets its power and toughness, but in reality that line of text IS its power and toughness

@@screamcollector Still not a great explanation. A regular Tarmogoyf would not get +2/+2 from Muraganda Peteoglyphs. It has a characteristic defining ability, which is still an ability.

@@Red-TowerIf a copy effect sets the characteristics of a card that are defined within a CDA, that ability is ignored compleatly. Scarab God would make Transguild Carrier, Universal Automaton and Goyf all vanilla creatures because setting their Colour, Type and P/T overrides their CDA.

@Red-Tower Glad I'm not the only one. Very weird indeed to have a rules interaction that basically makes a card lose an ability if what that ability refers to is overridden by a different effect. I think the shorthand explanations provided by others below miss the mark because they've kind of incorrect in the reasoning. The reasoning appears to be this rule that specifically prevents the characteristic defining ability from being copied at all: "707.9d When applying a copy effect that doesn’t copy a certain characteristic, retains one or more original values for a certain characteristic, or provides a specific set of values for a certain characteristic, any characteristic-defining ability (see rule 604.3) of the object being copied that defines that characteristic is not copied. If that characteristic is color, any color indicator (see rule 204) of that object is also not copied. This rule does not apply to copy effects with exceptions that state the object is a certain card type, supertype, and/or subtype “in addition to its other types.” In those cases, any characteristic-defining ability that defines card type, supertype, and/or subtype is copied. Example: Quicksilver Gargantuan is a creature that reads, “You may have Quicksilver Gargantuan enter the battlefield as a copy of any creature on the battlefield, except it’s 7/7.” Quicksilver Gargantuan enters the battlefield as a copy of Tarmogoyf, which has a characteristic-defining ability that defines its power and toughness. Quicksilver Gargantuan does not have that ability. It will be 7/7." So it isn't particularly a logic reason, it's a rule specifically made to handle this kind of interaction. It's just novel that the rule actually prevents the ability from being copied, rather than having it be sorted out in layers or something. Interesting choice, I wonder if there's another interaction this was done because of, or if it's just a way to make these kind of effects cleaner by removing any abilities that won't be relevant.

I can handle the Haakon question. It's because of how casting a spell works. The very first step of it is moving the card from where it is to the stack (601.2a). This causes the shapeshifter to gain the "Can't play creature spells" restriction. Later, the game checks if the spell is legal to cast (601.2e) and since it is no longer legal, the game reverts to before you put it on the stack. In the clone becoming a dryad arbor scenario, the creature remains legal to cast throughout the entire process, it is only as you choose the creature that it becomes illegal for the spell to move from the stack to the battlefield, which is after the point at which the legality of casting was checked.

flashback is a replacement effect, for an additional example if you were to flashback homestead courage while having a feather, the redeemed then you would be able to choose to exile the homestead courage and return it to hand at end step

There technically isn't a correct answer to this question as far as I'm aware, but there _is_ some precedent with cards like Silent Arbiter. Yes, the wording is ambiguous.

@@AmmiO2 I was generalizing. Silent Arbiter happens to be exactly the interaction I had been looking for! How was the precent set then?

@@ArchaicEX I think of it like this: If there's a ruling that can go 1 of 2 ways and there's no clear indication which is correct, err on the side of not punishing the player.

might be a (video) layers thing ---- those should be crossed out

Whenever a card's ability includes it's own name in reference to itself, it actually means "this card", meaning copy effects refer to themselves rather than the original.

Rule 201.5 is the particular rule that mentions this

You are correct. The Bear will be sacrificed to its trigger meaning when we go to deal damage, Fireball divides 1 damage evenly among 1 target. If in the event the number of targeted creatures is greater then X when we go to resolve Fireball, 0 damage is dealt. So it’s wrong on more then just “do we kill both creatures.”

I was thinking the same.

This may have been one of the ones I got wrong.

​@@AmmiO2 I thought this was because the 2 effects create a circular dependency, and therefore apply in timestamp order. B's Confiscated has an earlier timestamp, therefore applies first.

Spellskite's ability says "is this ability currently targeting me? If no, target me instead. If yes, nothing happens."

The effects happen simultaneously, so the Wolf exists in 2 states: #1 On the battlefield with both counters on it, and then #2: In the graveyard. When it checks to see if it should undy, it looks back at the last known board state and sees #1, which includes the +1 counter.

Yes.

They both trigger Tatyova and can both become creatures.

No.

You can activate Spellskite as many times as you have life/mana to pay for it AND you can activate it even if a spell doesn't target anything.

303.4g

Yes, "hand tracking" effects are automatic in digital.

Depends on how you cast the spell. You can announce a spell and then pay costs, in which case Kologhan would nug you for 10. Or you can pay the costs and then announce the spell, which case the Murky Boi is no longer in the graveyard when the spell enters the stack.

Replacement.

It *think* this was because the 2 effects create a circular dependency, and therefore apply in timestamp order. B's Confiscated has an earlier timestamp, therefore applies first.

Not true. My friend has a Sedris, the Traitor King commander deck and Teferi's Veil is one of the best cards in it because of this exact interaction where you get to keep your unearthed creature. So it comes up.

It doesn't matter how many times you activate it; you can only redirect 1 instance of the word "target" once.

The Tarmogoyf ability is tied to the P/T.

Tarmagoyf's ability is what is known as a characteristic defining ability (CDA) which allows it to function in all zones, including exile. Although duplicant doesn't copy goyf's ability, it does copy the p/t of the card tarmagoyf while it is in exile, which is set by tarmagoyf's CDA.

"605.3c Once a player begins to activate a mana ability, that ability can’t be activated again until it has resolved."

I know it's unintuitive but you can't. Only 1 switch per "target" word in the text.

It is not varying because duplicant got the tarmagoyf's ability, rather it is varying because the tarmagoyf's power and toughness is varying while in exile. Characteristic defining abilities apply in all zones, outside of the game, and even before the game begins. See CR604.3