Which damage gets prevented?
So in a game of @mtg@mtgzone.com the other day, my enemy attacked with Mons’s Goblin Raiders and Ghyrson. Which would normally deal four damage total then two more from Ghyrson. But I had played a Bandage, preventing “the next” damage. If that next damage is the one from the Goblins, I don’t get the extra Ghyrson damage, so that’s why it matters.
There was no first strike in this particular situation.
Thank you! The issue is that Ghyrson and the goblins do their damage simultaneously (3+1-1=3, but if that’s 2+1 I still get shot but if that’s 3+0 I don’t).
@xgranade@wandering.shop @mtg@mtgzone.com
@Sandra @mtg Ah, got it, I’d missed that Ghyrson was also attacking, sorry, now I see the problem. Oh, wow, that is a bit hairy… even reading the CRs it seems like there’s no real resolution to what “next” means in that case?
The Gatherer rulings on Bandage are similarly useless, I wonder if there’s another prevent-next effect that might have more useful rulings?
@Sandra @mtg OH! I found something!
615.7. […] If damage would be dealt to the shielded permanent or player by two or more applicable sources at the same time, the player or the controller of the permanent chooses which damage the shield prevents. […]
@Sandra @mtg If I understand right, you as the player being damaged get to choose which point of damage Bandage prevents out of the four incoming points… if you choose to block that assigned by the goblins, then there’s nothing for Ghryson to trigger off of, I think, so you get the 3 + 0 case?
@xgranade @Sandra @mtg and there are similar rules for otder types of replacement effects, the affected player gets to pick the order of replacements (some orders can cause other replacement effects to no longer apply)
@lovestha @Sandra @mtg Right, this is just a bit of a funny one in that there’s only one prevention effect, but multiple things it could apply to, instead of multiple effects applying to the same thing.
It makes sense a similar design philosophy holds in both cases, but without there being a separate 615.7, I’m not sure how you’d resolve the goblins + Ghyrson + Bandage example.
@xgranade @Sandra @mtg you wouldn’t, and there are *many* similar interactions, so having a solid reference isn’t surprising.
@xgranade @Sandra @mtg that unded like i’m impjying you are shocked there is an answer.
I’m not, i’m just tired after driving home after an excellent weekend of judging. Good night (before i imply more things i don’t mean)
@lovestha @Sandra @mtg I didn’t read it that way at all, it’s helpful context, thank you! I’m absolutely not a judge, so I appreciate learning more about!