Sometimes I write intimate eschatologies or words about technology and math. Sometimes I make things by burning them with light or squeezing them through a small, hot tube. Sometimes I push water with a stick while sitting in a tiny boat.
@lovestha @mtg I mean, I’m also pretty deeply enfranchised, but I do really like some of the UB stuff. I’m not even a huge LoTR fan, but the vibe fit quite well and had some very fun mechanics. FIN bringing saga creatures is really neat, and fits the vibes pretty nicely (esp after NEO) by the same token.
@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.
@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 Naively, I would think the goblins’ damage would be prevented, such that Ghyrson doesn’t fire? The wording of Ghyrson sounds like it triggers off of a source of damage resolving, such that it couldn’t happen before or simulntaneously with the goblins’ damage.
That is, I’d see it roughly as:
• Blockers are assigned
• Bandage goes on the stack
• Bandage resolves
• Damage resolution: Goblins do 1 damage
• Ghyrson’s trigger sees the damage
@lovestha @mtg Makes a lot of sense, yeah. I don’t know 40k at all, so those decks were kind of meh for me. A friend of mine is obsessed with 40k, though, and they loved that UB.