Got this one correct! I just assumed it was the same ruling that allows persist/undying to work because they need to be aware of the last battlefield state.
This exact style of interaction always trips people up the first time they play against Piru, the Volatile. More specifically the fact that her Lifelink applies to her death damage, which makes blasting everything on the board that isn't Legendary for 7 Lifelink damage apiece is absolutely hilarious
Then when it's in the graveyard we play Too Greedily Too Deep to get it back onto the board but this time just deal 7 damage to everything unanimously. Done that many times, it's fun!
This is like a summation of previous DDR. I have to assume most Magic players are not familiar with these rules, but I am since I am a frequent watcher of this channel. Even so, I wasn't sure about the first challenge question.
So this actually I think indirectly answers a question I commented a few DDRs ago on if last known information is "always" checked, in that it's not only referencing the object at say the last time things such a priority/state-based actions were looked at. So if I remove all -1/-1 counters from and sacrifice a Persist creature as part of the same cost, LKR will see that creature as having no counters, allowing Persist to trigger and return it. This is of course assuming I pay any "remove counter" portion of the costs before the "sacrifice a creature" portion.
Last-known information means "last". Whatever the last time it was on the battlefield, that's what the game looks at. Even if the information was different a few milliseconds before.
The way I like to think of this is that the creature dies on the battlefield and its corpse has to get dragged off the field into the graveyard. Since the corpse had the counter/lifelink/etc. then that's the information you use before it gets dragged off the field.
"the effect uses the current information of that object if it's in the public ozne it was expected to be in; if it's no longer in that zone, or if the effect has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the effect uses the object's last known information" Is't the zone it's expected to be in, the graveyard? Since a "when" trigger usually means "after", and afaik there is no zone inbetween battlefield and graveyard when it comes to creatures dying. I'm confused.
It is a pretty confusingly definition for sure. I think it can be best understood from this other rule: "some triggered abilities are exceptions to this rule; the game 'looks back in time' to determine if those abilities trigger, using the existence of those abilities and the appearance of objects immediately prior to the event" (CR 603.10). Leaves-the-battlefield abilities are listed as one such exception (CR 603.10a). In other words, when a leaves-the-battlefield triggers, the game does not look for the object in the graveyard, but it instead looks for the object as it existed on the battlefield ("...prior to the event"). The trigger itself "looks back in time" to when it was on the battlefield, thereby making it the expected zone, but the object is now in the graveyard, so last known information is applied as your rule establishes.
How would the original scenario work if the creature was dying to -1/-1 counters? Say Amy controls Stalking Vengeance and Civil Unrest, as in the original scenario, but has a Terrain Elemental with a +1/+1 counter (Terrain Elemental has base PT 3/2), and Nick plays Skinrender, putting three -1/-1 counters on the Terrain Elemental. Per the last example, last known information would say the Terrain Elemental has p/t 1/0, so Stalking Vengeance would have it deal damage, but would Uncivil Unrest see it having one +1/+1 counter and three -1/-1 counters, or as just having two -1/-1 counters?
704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it's put into its owner's graveyard. Regeneration can't replace this event. 704.5r If a permanent has both a +1/+1 counter and a -1/-1 counter on it, N +1/+1 and N -1/-1 counters are removed from it, where N is the smaller of the number of +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters on it. 704.7. If a state-based action results in a permanent leaving the battlefield at the same time other state-based actions were performed, that permanent's last known information is derived from the game state before any of those state-based actions were performed. I'm not a judge, but from my understanding, two SBA actions are happening here, so the game would see TE with one +1/+1 and three -1/-1 counters. The damage would be doubled, because it has +1/+1 counter. Same with persist and undying. I think that this question would be great to see in future DDR, because I don't remember any DDRs about this topic.
Hello, I've been looking for answers about my Opal eye deck that i cannot seem to find anywhere online, at least not any consistent answers. The wording on the card is somewhat unclear, do you make the choice of what source it is when it resolves? or do you make the yes/no decision the next time anything tries to deal damage? If its the case of the former, something like illusionist's bracers could let you choose multiple sources per activation, but in the case of the latter it would do nothing. I think opal eyes itself is just a really strange card and would love to know of any other cool rulings surrounding that card!
The only part of this interaction that makes me question whether it's doubled or not is civil unrest saying "a creature you control" when it's no longer a creature you control. You controlled it when it triggered an ability that deals damage, and it remembers it had a counter, but does it *truly* count as a creature you control?
Like everything else, what matters is who controlled it at the last moment it existed on the battlefield. If that was you, then your Uncivil Unrest can affect it. If it was some other player, then it can't, even if it was your creature originally or an ability you control that's causing it to deal damage.
Are triggers also allowed to use last know information? Malcolm triggers whenever a pirate you control deals damage? Does that still trigger if that creature is dead before the damage is dealt since it is no longer a creature you control nor is it a pirate. I assume yes but I can't see a specific ruling about triggers, only about replacement effects
4:22 Question abt Last challenge question. "Grizzly bear's power is -1. It's not possible to deal negative damage, so Nick's life total would not change..." Does the game still resolve the Stalking Vengeance's ability? does it try to deal the damage, but alas it is -1 so Nick's health doesn't change... but can this damage be affected? buffed? trigger something that triggers on non-combat damage? say Ojer for example. Say we have the original Final Challenge question, but the grizzly bear had base power 1, with a +1/+1 counter on it so Last Gasp puts the Grizzly Bear at -1/-1 but it has the counter for Uncivil Unrest. Would this "-1 Damage" cause Uncivil Unrest to attempt to double it to -2? Thanks for the DDR.
1. The ability would still trigger and resolve. 2. It can not really be buffed by any effect that you might be thinking of. No damage is being dealt so the game can't see that damage and double it/increase it to Ojer's power/buff it by 2 (think there's an enchantment that does that) 3. Honestly I don't know if the game would care about doubling negative power, but as far as the game is concerned, it's just 0. The stopgap for effects that care about modifying damage is that the damage first has to be dealt for replacement effects to take effect, so as long as the initial damage isn't dealt, the game won't care about any effects that would have changed the amount of damage At least as far as I understand the concept as a non-judge JFTW watcher :)
For the last example tho, if u had an effect(s) that caused that amount of damage +2 instead, then the -1 damage from the Grizzly Bear would be buffed back up to 1 damage. The game can't deal negative damage but it still recognizes it as a source trying to do damage... I think
Not quite. The damage Grizzly Bears would inflect (thanks to Stalking Vengance's ability) is determined to be -1 thanks to its last known information. That is of course is treated as zero damage, which in turn is treated as *no damage at all;* "replacement effects that would increase the damage dealt by that source... have no event to replace, so they have no effect." (CR 120.8)
Got this one correct! I just assumed it was the same ruling that allows persist/undying to work because they need to be aware of the last battlefield state.
This exact style of interaction always trips people up the first time they play against Piru, the Volatile. More specifically the fact that her Lifelink applies to her death damage, which makes blasting everything on the board that isn't Legendary for 7 Lifelink damage apiece is absolutely hilarious
Then when it's in the graveyard we play Too Greedily Too Deep to get it back onto the board but this time just deal 7 damage to everything unanimously. Done that many times, it's fun!
@@Luxalpa I just added TGTD to my list as well, since I happened to pull one. I need to work on the list a bit more but honestly it's a pretty fun one
This is like a summation of previous DDR. I have to assume most Magic players are not familiar with these rules, but I am since I am a frequent watcher of this channel. Even so, I wasn't sure about the first challenge question.
I'm proud I got this one so right I even predicted the final challenge question:)
I respect that the rules don’t allow for negative damage, BUT THEY SHOULD.
So this actually I think indirectly answers a question I commented a few DDRs ago on if last known information is "always" checked, in that it's not only referencing the object at say the last time things such a priority/state-based actions were looked at.
So if I remove all -1/-1 counters from and sacrifice a Persist creature as part of the same cost, LKR will see that creature as having no counters, allowing Persist to trigger and return it. This is of course assuming I pay any "remove counter" portion of the costs before the "sacrifice a creature" portion.
Last-known information means "last". Whatever the last time it was on the battlefield, that's what the game looks at. Even if the information was different a few milliseconds before.
Challenge questions are always a good way for me to test my knowledge. I got the first one wrong
The way I like to think of this is that the creature dies on the battlefield and its corpse has to get dragged off the field into the graveyard. Since the corpse had the counter/lifelink/etc. then that's the information you use before it gets dragged off the field.
Oh I guess this seems relevant to situations like Thud and Hammer combo
Having the creature deal damage is pretty rare, I love making really bad Infect synergies with these effects, like Livewire Lash.
LKI baby
"the effect uses the current information of that object if it's in the public ozne it was expected to be in; if it's no longer in that zone, or if the effect has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the effect uses the object's last known information"
Is't the zone it's expected to be in, the graveyard? Since a "when" trigger usually means "after", and afaik there is no zone inbetween battlefield and graveyard when it comes to creatures dying. I'm confused.
It is a pretty confusingly definition for sure. I think it can be best understood from this other rule: "some triggered abilities are exceptions to this rule; the game 'looks back in time' to determine if those abilities trigger, using the existence of those abilities and the appearance of objects immediately prior to the event" (CR 603.10). Leaves-the-battlefield abilities are listed as one such exception (CR 603.10a).
In other words, when a leaves-the-battlefield triggers, the game does not look for the object in the graveyard, but it instead looks for the object as it existed on the battlefield ("...prior to the event"). The trigger itself "looks back in time" to when it was on the battlefield, thereby making it the expected zone, but the object is now in the graveyard, so last known information is applied as your rule establishes.
Cool and interesting!
How would the original scenario work if the creature was dying to -1/-1 counters? Say Amy controls Stalking Vengeance and Civil Unrest, as in the original scenario, but has a Terrain Elemental with a +1/+1 counter (Terrain Elemental has base PT 3/2), and Nick plays Skinrender, putting three -1/-1 counters on the Terrain Elemental. Per the last example, last known information would say the Terrain Elemental has p/t 1/0, so Stalking Vengeance would have it deal damage, but would Uncivil Unrest see it having one +1/+1 counter and three -1/-1 counters, or as just having two -1/-1 counters?
704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it's put into its owner's graveyard. Regeneration can't replace this event.
704.5r If a permanent has both a +1/+1 counter and a -1/-1 counter on it, N +1/+1 and N -1/-1 counters are removed from it, where N is the smaller of the number of +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters on it.
704.7. If a state-based action results in a permanent leaving the battlefield at the same time other state-based actions were performed, that permanent's last known information is derived from the game state before any of those state-based actions were performed.
I'm not a judge, but from my understanding, two SBA actions are happening here, so the game would see TE with one +1/+1 and three -1/-1 counters. The damage would be doubled, because it has +1/+1 counter. Same with persist and undying.
I think that this question would be great to see in future DDR, because I don't remember any DDRs about this topic.
A similar question was considered in DDR#194: th-cam.com/video/f6m4jz5-v2Q/w-d-xo.html
Hello, I've been looking for answers about my Opal eye deck that i cannot seem to find anywhere online, at least not any consistent answers. The wording on the card is somewhat unclear, do you make the choice of what source it is when it resolves? or do you make the yes/no decision the next time anything tries to deal damage? If its the case of the former, something like illusionist's bracers could let you choose multiple sources per activation, but in the case of the latter it would do nothing. I think opal eyes itself is just a really strange card and would love to know of any other cool rulings surrounding that card!
The only part of this interaction that makes me question whether it's doubled or not is civil unrest saying "a creature you control" when it's no longer a creature you control. You controlled it when it triggered an ability that deals damage, and it remembers it had a counter, but does it *truly* count as a creature you control?
Like everything else, what matters is who controlled it at the last moment it existed on the battlefield. If that was you, then your Uncivil Unrest can affect it. If it was some other player, then it can't, even if it was your creature originally or an ability you control that's causing it to deal damage.
Are triggers also allowed to use last know information?
Malcolm triggers whenever a pirate you control deals damage? Does that still trigger if that creature is dead before the damage is dealt since it is no longer a creature you control nor is it a pirate.
I assume yes but I can't see a specific ruling about triggers, only about replacement effects
4:22
Question abt Last challenge question.
"Grizzly bear's power is -1. It's not possible to deal negative damage, so Nick's life total would not change..."
Does the game still resolve the Stalking Vengeance's ability? does it try to deal the damage, but alas it is -1 so Nick's health doesn't change... but can this damage be affected? buffed? trigger something that triggers on non-combat damage? say Ojer for example.
Say we have the original Final Challenge question, but the grizzly bear had base power 1, with a +1/+1 counter on it so Last Gasp puts the Grizzly Bear at -1/-1 but it has the counter for Uncivil Unrest. Would this "-1 Damage" cause Uncivil Unrest to attempt to double it to -2?
Thanks for the DDR.
1. The ability would still trigger and resolve.
2. It can not really be buffed by any effect that you might be thinking of. No damage is being dealt so the game can't see that damage and double it/increase it to Ojer's power/buff it by 2 (think there's an enchantment that does that)
3. Honestly I don't know if the game would care about doubling negative power, but as far as the game is concerned, it's just 0. The stopgap for effects that care about modifying damage is that the damage first has to be dealt for replacement effects to take effect, so as long as the initial damage isn't dealt, the game won't care about any effects that would have changed the amount of damage
At least as far as I understand the concept as a non-judge JFTW watcher :)
For the last example tho, if u had an effect(s) that caused that amount of damage +2 instead, then the -1 damage from the Grizzly Bear would be buffed back up to 1 damage. The game can't deal negative damage but it still recognizes it as a source trying to do damage... I think
Not quite.
The damage Grizzly Bears would inflect (thanks to Stalking Vengance's ability) is determined to be -1 thanks to its last known information. That is of course is treated as zero damage, which in turn is treated as *no damage at all;* "replacement effects that would increase the damage dealt by that source... have no event to replace, so they have no effect." (CR 120.8)