@@wEakling1918destroy is not quite correct, what you’re thinking of would be targeted effects that say destroy, which would be the T of DEBT. The reason this isnt quite right is because, for example, a creature with protection from white still gets destroyed by a wrath of god, or pro blue would stop get bounced with a cyclonic rift, or a creature with pro black and/or white still gets exiled with a merciless eviction.
DEBT is the way to remember it. D means you cannot DAMAGE it or DESTROY it E means you cannot ENCHANT it B means you cannot BLOCK it T means you cannot TARGET it.
@@Leftists_are_Losersyeah, like the commenter before me, I think the acronym only works if you know it correctly. D: Damage E: equipments and auras B: blocking T: targetting Destroy is not listed at all (as was explained in this video 😅), also you have to remember that auras are also affected not just equipment (the acronym should really be DEABT, but that isn't as memorable haha). Maybe the real acronym should be BATED.
Most of the time I see people play Teferi’s protection they refer to themselves as ‘phased out’ so I think there’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the card that begins with reading comprehension
I always thought you were phased.out.... if you have protection from everything, doesn't that mean all your curses will fall off? Phasing out means they don't hit you, but I've never heard of curses falling off from teferis protection
@@thecollectiblecollectabill2298 if YOU were phased out curses attached to you would phase out too. Any curses attached to you should fall off if you have protection from everything.
@@thecollectiblecollectabill2298 the card reads that only your permanents phase, players cannot phase. Protection would make curses fall off, it's the same if you enchant a creature with an aura and then give it protection from that colour until end of turn - the aura falls off
That's exactly it. I've never played a game where Teferi's Protection was used but I've watched Commander shows where the impression is the player and all their stuff phases out. Those players in the videos probably know proper effect but people watching get the wrong idea so when someone plays it against them in their own games at FNM, their understanding of the effect comes from their memory of seeing it on TH-cam.
I think people often think of Teferi's Protection as phasing everything out, including the player, which is what leads to strange assumptions about attacking them. But, of course, reading the card explains the card.
Functionally, in most pods, it is. That said, if you see it a lot, you can get really creative with it... And start seeing a lot less of it as a result.
it's insane to think so many people have misunderstood teferi's protection , I don't understand how they can't read, it makes complete sense if people just read the bloody card
@@SuperbFairy the human brain really likes mental shortcuts, they're far more energy efficient, especially when you're placed in a situation with closely linked social and time pressures. If you haven't taken the time to really grasp what the card actually says, including the subtext, and, a lot of players in the middle of a game don't, then it's easy to miss the small nuances that the mechanics Teferi's Protection actually has. The cross referencing required to fully understand the card is pretty huge, when you think about it, and when a card is giving you a litany of things you can't do, it can be hard to invert your own mode of thinking into what you can do. As an aside, I think this is a big part of the reason why people hate Stax so much, as an archetype: they get so focused on the barriers that they fail to see the holes in it, and there are always holes to be found.
I remember playing Teferi, Hero of Dominaria against Heliod, Sun-Crowned in Historic Brawl the other day. Opponent has nice board with Alseid of Life's Bounty. I put a Supreme Verdict on the stack. Opponent sits there for a good 20 seconds, unsure of what to do. He sacs Alseid, giving a creature Protection from Blue. Supreme Verdict then resolves destroying everything they knew and loved. Immediate scoop.
I'm always the one that has to be the "bad" guy and explain what protection does, and of course I will always be doubted and have to bust out the rules, why I still carry those little rule books from back in the day lol
@@jacobeaton5241I don't think commander damage gets around protection. The only reason he listed it in this video is because his commander (questing beast) specifically said that damage cannot be prevented, so it in a way trumps protection. For any other commander though they wouldn't deal commander damage through Teferi's Protection. So if you have taken 19 commander damage from my 4/4 commander and I swing in again, you cast Teferi's Protection, you're fine, you done take the damage. You're still on 19 commander damage. If however my commander was Questing Beast, it specifically says damage can't be prevented. So you're on 19 commander damage, I swing in with my 4/4 questing beast which damage can't be prevented from, you cast Teferi's Protection, but it can't protect against Questing Beast's damage because the damage can't be prevented. Therefore you go to 23 commander damage and lose. Maybe I misunderstood your comment, if so you can ignore this and hopefully it helps someone else. But if I understood it correctly then I hope it helps (and if I got something wrong please someone else correct me haha)
I am glad you made this to clarify the mechanic, i watched an edh video recently where a player had something that gave all their creatures protection from creatures, and then player 2 copied that creature so their creatures also had protection from creatures. The commentator then said "so player 1 and player 2 cant really attack each other anymore essentially" (they were implying that they had equal numbers of creatures and therefore their creatures would nullify each other/bounce off each other when they attack). I was there thinking "huh? I dont really play commander, but surely whoever attacks first is going to demolish the other player since they can't block any of the attacking creatures?". Conveniently this video popped up soon afterwards to reaffirm my belief in my understanding of the rules haha.
My friend casted Teferi’s Protection because he didn’t want to discard down to hand size. I had to argue with him a little bit that that’s not what that spell does. His misuse of that spell is probably why I won that game. I would have never questioned what he said if it wasn’t with your video, so thank you!
I made a video dedicated to covering Teferi's Protection as well, I also made a video that covers the differences and what happens in a situation when an Indestructible creature blocks a creature with Deathtouch, Trample, and Double Strike versus one that has Protection, DT, Trample, and DS. The Excess Damage will be different.
That combat attack and defend video is one of the first videos I saw of yours, I think it was the very first one. I was in a game of Commander and searched the answer and you had just uploaded it like 3 or 4 day before then. We had it play for the whole pod while we played.
I believe the whole misunderstanding with protection has to do with players being too casual with reading the rules. Wording in MTG is incredibly important and extremely specific. People often use what sounds logical, because the wording on the cards is sometimes weird. Not that the rules aren't complex. I was stunned the first time someone explained to me the synergy between deathtouch and trample. It made sense, but it had never occured to me that it worked like that.
In a recent game, I had no good players to attack to get my commander's attack trigger : so I attacked the guy who played Tef Pro since his defenders phased out; and I got my attack trigger.
Come back here to say this: playing Historic Brawl and had my opponent against the ropes at 3 life with 3 power to attack them with. They made a token of their One Ring to live another turn. I tutored for Stomp (Bonecrusher Giant) and targeted my 3 toughness creature with it. Damage can’t be prevented, attack for 3, win the game. Chef’s kiss 👌👌
The misconception people make is that the part of the card that reads "(while they're phased out, they're treated as though they don't exist. They phase in before you untap during your next untap step.) only applies to the permanents that phase out and not the player!!
Even since making a maarika deck I've had the pleasure of trying to explain each time I attack something that is indestructable that I still deal excess damage (thus triggering her ability) as damage is still dealt, the creature just doesnt die.
I'm so glad they went back on their plan to phase out Protection. As a long time player, it never felt like an "unfun" mechanic, just one that you need to play against/play with to understand. When they said they were going to stop printing it, it was after they already started phasing out other mechanics & replacing them with new, simplified keywords... which felt like they were dumbing down the game at the time (Hexproof being the most notable one). After a while, I missed the older mechanics like Protection or landwalk... even Shroud was preferred over the tons of Hexproof stuff that was initially running around. MTG is inherently a complex game, and it's something I feel works best when they lean into that. Sometimes it takes a while for them to get it right (like Phasing), but it's still better than simplifying the game just because something is initially confusing.
I agree with you whokeheartedly. This is a complex, nuanced game, whuch as players we generally love, but it's not for everybody. WotC would sure love for it to be for everybody, though, to pad their bottom line, so they do away with rules, or dumb them down to make it more approachable. GW has been doing the same thing with 49k, but seems blussfully unaware tgat their ridiculiys pricing model is driving away far more customers than the ruleset ever was. Just another example of greed overtaking the product they intended to sell.
It always pisses me off that to this day there are people that still think that Protection stops destruction board wipes because it stops damage board wipes, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. Also, you can also apply the Teferis protection thing with Poison, same idea in principle with the prevention stuff but easier to pull off because there are more cards that apply poison AND proriferate doesnt target.
I generally like protection, and for many years there was a relationship between trample and protection that was fair, so for instance if I block your 4/4 red creature with trample with my 2/2 protection from red creature I would take 2 damage (the original alpha era rule was unfair as a Ball Lightning, a 6/1 trampler could be blocked by a 1/2 protection from red creature and the defender would take no damage). However, when deathtouch was introduced, they made the trample rules unfair again in the opposite direction. If my 5/5 prot creature blocked a 6/6 trampler with deathtouch, then I would take 5 damage. This is extremely illogical, as the creature itself is totally immune to deathtouch, and so the deathtouch should have no effect.
Question about protection. New to the game, so sorry if this is common knowledge. I have a commander deck that is pretty much a dragon tribe deck. My wife has an angel deck. One of her angels has protection from dragons. Does that mean that whenever I attack with multiple dragons, she can block them all with that one angel and not take any damage?
I bought a Teferi's Protection and the guy who sent it literally wrote on the plastic around it "Remember, this doesn't protect you from milling!" I laughed out loud cause sure it doesn't protect from ALL things in the game but pretty much anything an opponent with throw at you does
Is this the same for OTHER spells that prevent or phase out Because there are still people at my LGS that say this only works for TP and when I bring up they should be taking commder damage i get overruled 3-1
I'm a little confused on how certain Auras work in the rulings like Spectral Ward and Benevolent Blessings that add the type line "This effect doesn't remove aura's and equipment that are currently attached to it". I always assumed those were the rules from protection since there were quite a few white cards that have a similar effect. It seems odd that they could just print on a card to ignore a fundamental rule of the game. Are there any other cards that do something similar to this? The only cards I can think of off the top of my head are that legend rule no longer applies.
That's sort of how all Magic cards work. There are the rules of Magic that are listed in the Comprehensive Rules, but then Magic is comprised of thousands of cards that come with their own rules printed on them. In the rules of Magic, there are things called State-Based Actions (SBA) and one of them states that when a creature has more than zero Toughness but also has more damage marked on it than their Toughness then they are sent to the Graveyard. Well that's the rule that Indestructible overrides. Lots of cards have their own text that either add rules to the game or replace rules of the game.
Wait there are cards, that grant protection from a color but they also say, that they won't affect cards already equipped or enchanted (which obiously includes Auras). As far as I'm concerned that means, Auras don't fall off even if a creature gains protection from the aura's color.
I hate Teferi's protection not because it's a good card but because 7 times out of 10 people think they can't be attacked, milled or caused to discard from wheels. Also auras coming into the battlefield would attach to something even if it has protection or ward type effects.
What about Balan? If I use Vexilus Praetor to give it pro everything…I can still use its ability to attach equipment right? Because the ability doesn’t target? Or does it fall off because colorless is included in everything?
Not only is "colorless" included in everything, so is "artifacts", "equipment", "cards containing reminder text", "my grandmother" and "itself". So yes, you technically can activate Balan for 2 mana and equip all equipment to him, but then the game sees equipment attached to a creature that has protection from them and unattaches them again :)
How does protection interact with mutation, if at all? Is it similar to auras or equipments in that if you give a mutated creature stack protection from a color, and one of the creatures in the stack is that color, do they un-mutate?
If a creature has Protection from Creatures or a color of the Mutate spell you're trying to cast then it will not work as when cast for it's Mutate it does target. Once you have mutated a creature though, giving it Pro 'value' will not make the Mutate stack fall apart in any way. Mutate isn't something being "attached" and Protection only stops things being "attached".
I have a rakdos lord of riots deck that runs multiple damage can't be prevented effects. Also runs multiple players can't gain life effects. It's quite disrespect.
I was taught when I started playing that deathtouch plus lifelink was the best ability combo because of a creature with both did at least one damage to another creature that creature would be destroyed and you would gain life equal to its full toughness but recently someone told me that isn’t true and that you would only gain life equal to the damage dealt. can I get some clarification?
every card that has lifelink with the reminder text or the rules clearly state life is gained equal to the damage dealt by the source that has lifelink. deathtouch makes it so any damage dealt is enough for lethal, so if the opponent blocks a 3 power creature with deathtouch, you can assign 1 point of damage to each, completely ignoring their toughness if its bigger, and kill all 3. perhaps this is where the person was teaching you wrong was confused about. also wanted to add that with both abilities, it cares about damage in general so it can be via combat or other means!
so if (protection) is the topic of discussion…. then please clarify the interaction with Animar Soul of the Elements protection form blank and white…..So even when i had Animar on the battlefield and my commander was being the target of a black or white spell or attacking from a black or white creature (should the spell or attacking creature bounce or fizzle) got into a few arguments over this interaction with Animar…….So either im right on how Animar Soul of the Elements works or i was wrong on the interaction form the beginning…… please clarify
Animar having protection from black and white means he can’t be targeted at all (from your spells and opponent spells) by black and white spells. It’s almost like color selective shroud. If someone is telling you Animar can be targeted but the spell fizzles, they’re wrong. It’s not like the ward keyword.
thank you for your comment and clarifying on this matter… Animar was the commander that got me playing magic and the commander format, this really helped me out and i should have trusted my instincts and instead i was fooled by my opponents and lost some big games, even some in which i should have won…..(mistakes were made and now i hope to from them) thank you again for your help
I'm curious: Who here in the comment section actually plays with commander damage in their playgroup? This was the first and only rule we changed. We don't do commander damage
@@cosmicodyssey3382 true, they could, their is an aura in white that gives protection from every color and since its an aura they put "aura are not removed" on it.
DEBT is how I always remember protection
I use DEBT as well but I always think D is destroy or damage instead of just damage
@@wEakling1918destroy is not quite correct, what you’re thinking of would be targeted effects that say destroy, which would be the T of DEBT. The reason this isnt quite right is because, for example, a creature with protection from white still gets destroyed by a wrath of god, or pro blue would stop get bounced with a cyclonic rift, or a creature with pro black and/or white still gets exiled with a merciless eviction.
DEBT is the way to remember it.
D means you cannot DAMAGE it or DESTROY it
E means you cannot ENCHANT it
B means you cannot BLOCK it
T means you cannot TARGET it.
@@Leftists_are_Losers See this is the trap, though. D is ONLY FOR DAMAGE, you can still destroy things that have protection.
@@Leftists_are_Losersyeah, like the commenter before me, I think the acronym only works if you know it correctly.
D: Damage
E: equipments and auras
B: blocking
T: targetting
Destroy is not listed at all (as was explained in this video 😅), also you have to remember that auras are also affected not just equipment (the acronym should really be DEABT, but that isn't as memorable haha). Maybe the real acronym should be BATED.
For "Protection from," I always remember DEBT.
Damage
Equip/Enchant
Blocking
Targeting
Most of the time I see people play Teferi’s protection they refer to themselves as ‘phased out’ so I think there’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the card that begins with reading comprehension
I always thought you were phased.out.... if you have protection from everything, doesn't that mean all your curses will fall off? Phasing out means they don't hit you, but I've never heard of curses falling off from teferis protection
@@thecollectiblecollectabill2298 if YOU were phased out curses attached to you would phase out too. Any curses attached to you should fall off if you have protection from everything.
@@thecollectiblecollectabill2298 the card reads that only your permanents phase, players cannot phase. Protection would make curses fall off, it's the same if you enchant a creature with an aura and then give it protection from that colour until end of turn - the aura falls off
That's exactly it. I've never played a game where Teferi's Protection was used but I've watched Commander shows where the impression is the player and all their stuff phases out. Those players in the videos probably know proper effect but people watching get the wrong idea so when someone plays it against them in their own games at FNM, their understanding of the effect comes from their memory of seeing it on TH-cam.
I think people often think of Teferi's Protection as phasing everything out, including the player, which is what leads to strange assumptions about attacking them. But, of course, reading the card explains the card.
Functionally, in most pods, it is. That said, if you see it a lot, you can get really creative with it... And start seeing a lot less of it as a result.
it's insane to think so many people have misunderstood teferi's protection , I don't understand how they can't read, it makes complete sense if people just read the bloody card
@@SuperbFairy the human brain really likes mental shortcuts, they're far more energy efficient, especially when you're placed in a situation with closely linked social and time pressures. If you haven't taken the time to really grasp what the card actually says, including the subtext, and, a lot of players in the middle of a game don't, then it's easy to miss the small nuances that the mechanics Teferi's Protection actually has.
The cross referencing required to fully understand the card is pretty huge, when you think about it, and when a card is giving you a litany of things you can't do, it can be hard to invert your own mode of thinking into what you can do. As an aside, I think this is a big part of the reason why people hate Stax so much, as an archetype: they get so focused on the barriers that they fail to see the holes in it, and there are always holes to be found.
I remember playing Teferi, Hero of Dominaria against Heliod, Sun-Crowned in Historic Brawl the other day. Opponent has nice board with Alseid of Life's Bounty. I put a Supreme Verdict on the stack. Opponent sits there for a good 20 seconds, unsure of what to do. He sacs Alseid, giving a creature Protection from Blue.
Supreme Verdict then resolves destroying everything they knew and loved. Immediate scoop.
I'm always the one that has to be the "bad" guy and explain what protection does, and of course I will always be doubted and have to bust out the rules, why I still carry those little rule books from back in the day lol
Just fought some one about commander damage getting around where is the ruling
@@jacobeaton5241I don't think commander damage gets around protection. The only reason he listed it in this video is because his commander (questing beast) specifically said that damage cannot be prevented, so it in a way trumps protection. For any other commander though they wouldn't deal commander damage through Teferi's Protection.
So if you have taken 19 commander damage from my 4/4 commander and I swing in again, you cast Teferi's Protection, you're fine, you done take the damage. You're still on 19 commander damage.
If however my commander was Questing Beast, it specifically says damage can't be prevented. So you're on 19 commander damage, I swing in with my 4/4 questing beast which damage can't be prevented from, you cast Teferi's Protection, but it can't protect against Questing Beast's damage because the damage can't be prevented. Therefore you go to 23 commander damage and lose.
Maybe I misunderstood your comment, if so you can ignore this and hopefully it helps someone else. But if I understood it correctly then I hope it helps (and if I got something wrong please someone else correct me haha)
There are actual little rule books?
@@multiekstravardistan4480 yeah they used to come in tournament decks and other various products back in the day
I am glad you made this to clarify the mechanic, i watched an edh video recently where a player had something that gave all their creatures protection from creatures, and then player 2 copied that creature so their creatures also had protection from creatures. The commentator then said "so player 1 and player 2 cant really attack each other anymore essentially" (they were implying that they had equal numbers of creatures and therefore their creatures would nullify each other/bounce off each other when they attack). I was there thinking "huh? I dont really play commander, but surely whoever attacks first is going to demolish the other player since they can't block any of the attacking creatures?". Conveniently this video popped up soon afterwards to reaffirm my belief in my understanding of the rules haha.
yes, protection from creatures essentially means unblockable.
Theres a reason wizards stopped printing protection for a while, because it’s so confusing for a lot of people
Apparently not confusing enough eh.
Nah, they stopped printing it cuz it was brutal to get randomly paired against an opponent with creatures you can't block or interact with.
My friend casted Teferi’s Protection because he didn’t want to discard down to hand size. I had to argue with him a little bit that that’s not what that spell does. His misuse of that spell is probably why I won that game. I would have never questioned what he said if it wasn’t with your video, so thank you!
Back in 2000-s Beloved Chaplain had a name "Putin" in our LGS, he really looks like him
I made a video dedicated to covering Teferi's Protection as well, I also made a video that covers the differences and what happens in a situation when an Indestructible creature blocks a creature with Deathtouch, Trample, and Double Strike versus one that has Protection, DT, Trample, and DS. The Excess Damage will be different.
That combat attack and defend video is one of the first videos I saw of yours, I think it was the very first one. I was in a game of Commander and searched the answer and you had just uploaded it like 3 or 4 day before then. We had it play for the whole pod while we played.
@@craig1287 Thanks! Glad you found the video to be helpful in your group.
People wouldn’t listen to me about questing beast either. Thanks for the vid.
I believe the whole misunderstanding with protection has to do with players being too casual with reading the rules. Wording in MTG is incredibly important and extremely specific. People often use what sounds logical, because the wording on the cards is sometimes weird.
Not that the rules aren't complex. I was stunned the first time someone explained to me the synergy between deathtouch and trample. It made sense, but it had never occured to me that it worked like that.
In a recent game, I had no good players to attack to get my commander's attack trigger : so I attacked the guy who played Tef Pro since his defenders phased out; and I got my attack trigger.
Come back here to say this: playing Historic Brawl and had my opponent against the ropes at 3 life with 3 power to attack them with. They made a token of their One Ring to live another turn. I tutored for Stomp (Bonecrusher Giant) and targeted my 3 toughness creature with it. Damage can’t be prevented, attack for 3, win the game. Chef’s kiss 👌👌
The misconception people make is that the part of the card that reads "(while they're phased
out, they're treated as though they don't exist. They phase in before you untap during your next
untap step.) only applies to the permanents that phase out and not the player!!
Video came at the perfect time! I was in the Google and Reddit rabbit hole regarding protection
Protection regarding "target" is basically "shroud of color" to simplify.
Excellent video. Really cleared this up for me!
Even since making a maarika deck I've had the pleasure of trying to explain each time I attack something that is indestructable that I still deal excess damage (thus triggering her ability) as damage is still dealt, the creature just doesnt die.
I'm so glad they went back on their plan to phase out Protection. As a long time player, it never felt like an "unfun" mechanic, just one that you need to play against/play with to understand.
When they said they were going to stop printing it, it was after they already started phasing out other mechanics & replacing them with new, simplified keywords... which felt like they were dumbing down the game at the time (Hexproof being the most notable one).
After a while, I missed the older mechanics like Protection or landwalk... even Shroud was preferred over the tons of Hexproof stuff that was initially running around. MTG is inherently a complex game, and it's something I feel works best when they lean into that. Sometimes it takes a while for them to get it right (like Phasing), but it's still better than simplifying the game just because something is initially confusing.
I agree with you whokeheartedly. This is a complex, nuanced game, whuch as players we generally love, but it's not for everybody. WotC would sure love for it to be for everybody, though, to pad their bottom line, so they do away with rules, or dumb them down to make it more approachable. GW has been doing the same thing with 49k, but seems blussfully unaware tgat their ridiculiys pricing model is driving away far more customers than the ruleset ever was.
Just another example of greed overtaking the product they intended to sell.
It always pisses me off that to this day there are people that still think that Protection stops destruction board wipes because it stops damage board wipes, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. Also, you can also apply the Teferis protection thing with Poison, same idea in principle with the prevention stuff but easier to pull off because there are more cards that apply poison AND proriferate doesnt target.
I was today years old when I discovered...if u give something protection from a color, the aura of that color, falls off that something. What?
Arcmage
I generally like protection, and for many years there was a relationship between trample and protection that was fair, so for instance if I block your 4/4 red creature with trample with my 2/2 protection from red creature I would take 2 damage (the original alpha era rule was unfair as a Ball Lightning, a 6/1 trampler could be blocked by a 1/2 protection from red creature and the defender would take no damage). However, when deathtouch was introduced, they made the trample rules unfair again in the opposite direction. If my 5/5 prot creature blocked a 6/6 trampler with deathtouch, then I would take 5 damage. This is extremely illogical, as the creature itself is totally immune to deathtouch, and so the deathtouch should have no effect.
I have a haktos keyword soup deck. That protection tribal is very important and underrated
Question about protection.
New to the game, so sorry if this is common knowledge.
I have a commander deck that is pretty much a dragon tribe deck. My wife has an angel deck. One of her angels has protection from dragons. Does that mean that whenever I attack with multiple dragons, she can block them all with that one angel and not take any damage?
Man so many fights over the that aura I have seen.
Man, where was this video last weekend when I played against protection from every thing . I would of won
I bought a Teferi's Protection and the guy who sent it literally wrote on the plastic around it "Remember, this doesn't protect you from milling!" I laughed out loud cause sure it doesn't protect from ALL things in the game but pretty much anything an opponent with throw at you does
I love that it takes 200 rocket scientists to figure out the wording on the card sucks balls. I would have never figured it out.
Is this the same for OTHER spells that prevent or phase out
Because there are still people at my LGS that say this only works for TP and when I bring up they should be taking commder damage i get overruled 3-1
Can you target things in the graveyard with protection ?
I'm a little confused on how certain Auras work in the rulings like Spectral Ward and Benevolent Blessings that add the type line "This effect doesn't remove aura's and equipment that are currently attached to it". I always assumed those were the rules from protection since there were quite a few white cards that have a similar effect. It seems odd that they could just print on a card to ignore a fundamental rule of the game. Are there any other cards that do something similar to this? The only cards I can think of off the top of my head are that legend rule no longer applies.
The new omnath makes it so you don't lose mana during steps and phases is prob the most recent example
That's sort of how all Magic cards work. There are the rules of Magic that are listed in the Comprehensive Rules, but then Magic is comprised of thousands of cards that come with their own rules printed on them. In the rules of Magic, there are things called State-Based Actions (SBA) and one of them states that when a creature has more than zero Toughness but also has more damage marked on it than their Toughness then they are sent to the Graveyard. Well that's the rule that Indestructible overrides. Lots of cards have their own text that either add rules to the game or replace rules of the game.
Wait there are cards, that grant protection from a color but they also say, that they won't affect cards already equipped or enchanted (which obiously includes Auras). As far as I'm concerned that means, Auras don't fall off even if a creature gains protection from the aura's color.
I always say protection protects you from DEBT
Damage
Enchanted
Blocking
Targeting
Its helped me out a lot
The E is Enchanting and Equipping
Ok or not haha, because equipment is Targeting
I hate Teferi's protection not because it's a good card but because 7 times out of 10 people think they can't be attacked, milled or caused to discard from wheels. Also auras coming into the battlefield would attach to something even if it has protection or ward type effects.
What about assigning combat damage with keyword abilities? Have you done that one?
I remember it by DEBT. Protect is cannot be DEBT. Dealt Damage, Enchanted, Blocked or Targeted by what's it protected from.
Can you share your Questing Beast Decklist?
Does anyone know if a Fynn the fangbearer still puts poison on someone after a Teferis protection? Since the death touch creatures still getting thru?
What about Balan? If I use Vexilus Praetor to give it pro everything…I can still use its ability to attach equipment right? Because the ability doesn’t target? Or does it fall off because colorless is included in everything?
Not only is "colorless" included in everything, so is "artifacts", "equipment", "cards containing reminder text", "my grandmother" and "itself". So yes, you technically can activate Balan for 2 mana and equip all equipment to him, but then the game sees equipment attached to a creature that has protection from them and unattaches them again :)
Imagine being so confident in your wrongness you call someone else a noob for getting it right.
didn't knew about the auras and equipments interaction, when you say they fall off you mean auras go to the graveyard and equipments unequip?
you are correct
Just think baited or BTEDD (can’t be blocked, targeted, enchanted, or dealt damage).
TH-cam commenters suffer from Dunning Kruger effect, more news at 11 😆
Dang when you phase out you leave yourself wide open for commander damage!! ?
How does protection interact with mutation, if at all? Is it similar to auras or equipments in that if you give a mutated creature stack protection from a color, and one of the creatures in the stack is that color, do they un-mutate?
If a creature has Protection from Creatures or a color of the Mutate spell you're trying to cast then it will not work as when cast for it's Mutate it does target. Once you have mutated a creature though, giving it Pro 'value' will not make the Mutate stack fall apart in any way. Mutate isn't something being "attached" and Protection only stops things being "attached".
I have a rakdos lord of riots deck that runs multiple damage can't be prevented effects. Also runs multiple players can't gain life effects. It's quite disrespect.
Idk protection from everything means I have protection from my opponent existing so when u play it they should spontaneously combust.
I didn’t know protection causes equipment and auras to fall off
I was taught when I started playing that deathtouch plus lifelink was the best ability combo because of a creature with both did at least one damage to another creature that creature would be destroyed and you would gain life equal to its full toughness but recently someone told me that isn’t true and that you would only gain life equal to the damage dealt. can I get some clarification?
every card that has lifelink with the reminder text or the rules clearly state life is gained equal to the damage dealt by the source that has lifelink.
deathtouch makes it so any damage dealt is enough for lethal, so if the opponent blocks a 3 power creature with deathtouch, you can assign 1 point of damage to each, completely ignoring their toughness if its bigger, and kill all 3.
perhaps this is where the person was teaching you wrong was confused about.
also wanted to add that with both abilities, it cares about damage in general so it can be via combat or other means!
@@uhfrank thanks I always knew how lifelink worked but with deathtouch was the only scenario where I was miseducated
so if (protection) is the topic of discussion…. then please clarify the interaction with Animar Soul of the Elements protection form blank and white…..So even when i had Animar on the battlefield and my commander was being the target of a black or white spell or attacking from a black or white creature (should the spell or attacking creature bounce or fizzle) got into a few arguments over this interaction with Animar…….So either im right on how Animar Soul of the Elements works or i was wrong on the interaction form the beginning…… please clarify
Animar having protection from black and white means he can’t be targeted at all (from your spells and opponent spells) by black and white spells. It’s almost like color selective shroud.
If someone is telling you Animar can be targeted but the spell fizzles, they’re wrong. It’s not like the ward keyword.
thank you for your comment and clarifying on this matter… Animar was the commander that got me playing magic and the commander format, this really helped me out and i should have trusted my instincts and instead i was fooled by my opponents and lost some big games, even some in which i should have won…..(mistakes were made and now i hope to from them) thank you again for your help
I'm curious: Who here in the comment section actually plays with commander damage in their playgroup? This was the first and only rule we changed. We don't do commander damage
I find teferi’s protection to be funny sometimes
You cast it? Cool, I’m going to make each opponent discard their hand, including you.
8:27 so that means they can’t make another sword with pro multi and pro colorless?
If they make a pro colorless sword, then you can't equip it since you sword is itself colorless! So it doesn't work nah
@@n8w00d8 well they could put except itself I’ve seen that on an enchantment I think but that makes it less useful.
@@cosmicodyssey3382 true, they could, their is an aura in white that gives protection from every color and since its an aura they put "aura are not removed" on it.
@@n8w00d8 I vaguely remember that card
Yeah!
Nope, number one has to be Banding. 😂
More misunderstood than Banding? LOL
4th
This video from MTGRemy goes perfect with this: th-cam.com/video/pQsG_25Wxxw/w-d-xo.html
How can you target me for an attack if i have protection
You need to read what protection DOES.
Attacking does not target. It's that simple.
You should watch the video... It literally tells you, attacking does NOT target
how in the world can you do a video about protection and not mention debt
So I guess the cards saying "choose a creature" work the same on hexproof / shroud permanents ?