iMtG Server: Gathering

Magic (The Gathering) => Rules => Topic started by: Destore117 on August 22, 2014, 12:55:16 AM

Title: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Destore117 on August 22, 2014, 12:55:16 AM
So my friend went to an M15 draft and ran Mono white Lifegain and he was saying if {Spectra Ward} was on a creature, he could still enchant it with otherauras. He even asked the head judge there who said this was ok.

I wanna say no because although it doesn't remove auras already on the creature, the creature may NOT be targeted, blocked, dealt damage by, or enchanted by colored things

Correct?
Or does this card have some kind of special ruling that allows additional colored auras?...

Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: blackychan1 on August 22, 2014, 12:58:01 AM
You are correct. Spectra ward does not remove previous enchantments. The words "protection from" always mean the same thing. It does not change. It can no longer be targeted by Auras.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Destore117 on August 22, 2014, 01:00:13 AM
Quote from: blackychan1 on August 22, 2014, 12:58:01 AM
You are correct. Spectra ward does not remove previous enchantments. The words "protection from" always mean the same thing. It does not change. It can no longer be targeted by Auras.

Thank you, I tried explaining this, now I either failed at my explanation or he just doesn't understand how protection works.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: blackychan1 on August 22, 2014, 01:23:47 AM
It is also worth noting that he CAN still target it with colorless Auras, like {eldrazi conscription}.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Ekann1 on August 22, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Also, auras that are put directly on the battlefield somehow (can't think of a way right now but I'm sure someone will) don't target and can be put on the creature enchanted with spectra ward.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: rarehuntertay on August 22, 2014, 11:39:54 AM
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 22, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Also, auras that are put directly on the battlefield somehow (can't think of a way right now but I'm sure someone will) don't target and can be put on the creature enchanted with spectra ward.
{Zur the Enchanter}
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Ekann1 on August 22, 2014, 11:44:45 AM
Quote from: rarehuntertay on August 22, 2014, 11:39:54 AM
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 22, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Also, auras that are put directly on the battlefield somehow (can't think of a way right now but I'm sure someone will) don't target and can be put on the creature enchanted with spectra ward.
{Zur the Enchanter}
That works. There's something from the Alara block too right?
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Munchlax on August 22, 2014, 11:49:38 AM
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 22, 2014, 11:44:45 AM
Quote from: rarehuntertay on August 22, 2014, 11:39:54 AM
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 22, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Also, auras that are put directly on the battlefield somehow (can't think of a way right now but I'm sure someone will) don't target and can be put on the creature enchanted with spectra ward.
{Zur the Enchanter}
That works. There's something from the Alara block too right?
{Soverigns of Lost Alara}
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Ekann1 on August 22, 2014, 12:06:52 PM
Quote from: Munchlax on August 22, 2014, 11:49:38 AM
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 22, 2014, 11:44:45 AM
Quote from: rarehuntertay on August 22, 2014, 11:39:54 AM
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 22, 2014, 11:34:41 AM
Also, auras that are put directly on the battlefield somehow (can't think of a way right now but I'm sure someone will) don't target and can be put on the creature enchanted with spectra ward.
{Zur the Enchanter}
That works. There's something from the Alara block too right?
{Soverigns of Lost Alara}
That one might be different actually, because of the wording "could enchant." Hmm.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Pleeb on August 22, 2014, 01:00:51 PM
I'm going to go with the none of the cheaty methods mentioned will work to add enchantments to the creature enchanted with spectra ward. Protection explicitly prevents the enchanting of a creature (the E in debt). The ward only modifies the rule for enchantments already attached to the creature.

702.16c (http://imtgapp.com/forum/index.php?action=imtg;area=rule;number=702.16c): A permanent or player with protection can't be enchanted by Auras that have the stated quality. Such Auras attached to the permanent or player with protection will be put into their owners' graveyards as a state-based action. (See rule 704, "State-Based Actions.")
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Ekann1 on August 22, 2014, 03:07:37 PM
Quote from: Pleeb on August 22, 2014, 01:00:51 PM
I'm going to go with the none of the cheaty methods mentioned will work to add enchantments to the creature enchanted with spectra ward. Protection explicitly prevents the enchanting of a creature (the E in debt). The ward only modifies the rule for enchantments already attached to the creature.

702.16c (http://imtgapp.com/forum/index.php?action=imtg;area=rule;number=702.16c): A permanent or player with protection can't be enchanted by Auras that have the stated quality. Such Auras attached to the permanent or player with protection will be put into their owners' graveyards as a state-based action. (See rule 704, "State-Based Actions.")
Rules text:
"Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +2/+2 and has protection from all colors. This effect doesn't remove Auras."

It can't be targeted (the "Enchant creature" targets), but once it's there, Spectra Ward's text overrides the E of debt, allowing the aura to stay.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 22, 2014, 03:31:53 PM
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 22, 2014, 03:07:37 PM
Quote from: Pleeb on August 22, 2014, 01:00:51 PM
I'm going to go with the none of the cheaty methods mentioned will work to add enchantments to the creature enchanted with spectra ward. Protection explicitly prevents the enchanting of a creature (the E in debt). The ward only modifies the rule for enchantments already attached to the creature.

702.16c (http://imtgapp.com/forum/index.php?action=imtg;area=rule;number=702.16c): A permanent or player with protection can't be enchanted by Auras that have the stated quality. Such Auras attached to the permanent or player with protection will be put into their owners' graveyards as a state-based action. (See rule 704, "State-Based Actions.")
Rules text:
"Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +2/+2 and has protection from all colors. This effect doesn't remove Auras."

It can't be targeted (the "Enchant creature" targets), but once it's there, Spectra Ward's text overrides the E of debt, allowing the aura to stay.
He was saying that he thinks things such as {Zur the Enchanter} don't get around {Spectra Ward}.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Tthmax on August 22, 2014, 03:32:56 PM
What about the fact that on the card it says: can't be damaged, targeted or blocked. There's nothing on it about 'enchanted' wicht is usualy in 'debt'.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: particle on August 22, 2014, 03:35:51 PM
Quote from: Tthmax on August 22, 2014, 03:32:56 PM
What about the fact that on the card it says: can't be damaged, targeted or blocked. There's nothing on it about 'enchanted' wicht is usualy in 'debt'.

this is because if it said "enchanted" the enchantments would fall off that are attached. to try to enchant a new card to it, you would need to target it, which is prevented.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Tthmax on August 22, 2014, 03:36:34 PM
Clear! Thanks
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Ekann1 on August 22, 2014, 06:00:14 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 22, 2014, 03:31:53 PM
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 22, 2014, 03:07:37 PM
Quote from: Pleeb on August 22, 2014, 01:00:51 PM
I'm going to go with the none of the cheaty methods mentioned will work to add enchantments to the creature enchanted with spectra ward. Protection explicitly prevents the enchanting of a creature (the E in debt). The ward only modifies the rule for enchantments already attached to the creature.

702.16c (http://imtgapp.com/forum/index.php?action=imtg;area=rule;number=702.16c): A permanent or player with protection can't be enchanted by Auras that have the stated quality. Such Auras attached to the permanent or player with protection will be put into their owners' graveyards as a state-based action. (See rule 704, "State-Based Actions.")
Rules text:
"Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +2/+2 and has protection from all colors. This effect doesn't remove Auras."

It can't be targeted (the "Enchant creature" targets), but once it's there, Spectra Ward's text overrides the E of debt, allowing the aura to stay.
He was saying that he thinks things such as {Zur the Enchanter} don't get around {Spectra Ward}.
This was from Zur's rulings:

7/15/2006   If you use Zur the Enchanter's triggered ability to search for an Aura, it will be put onto the battlefield attached to an appropriate permanent. It doesn't target that permanent. If no appropriate permanent exists for it to be attached to, that Aura can't be put onto the battlefield and stays in your library.

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=121162
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Pleeb on August 23, 2014, 12:36:28 AM
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 22, 2014, 06:00:14 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on August 22, 2014, 03:31:53 PM
Quote from: E.kann1 on August 22, 2014, 03:07:37 PM
Quote from: Pleeb on August 22, 2014, 01:00:51 PM
I'm going to go with the none of the cheaty methods mentioned will work to add enchantments to the creature enchanted with spectra ward. Protection explicitly prevents the enchanting of a creature (the E in debt). The ward only modifies the rule for enchantments already attached to the creature.

702.16c (http://imtgapp.com/forum/index.php?action=imtg;area=rule;number=702.16c): A permanent or player with protection can't be enchanted by Auras that have the stated quality. Such Auras attached to the permanent or player with protection will be put into their owners' graveyards as a state-based action. (See rule 704, "State-Based Actions.")
Rules text:
"Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +2/+2 and has protection from all colors. This effect doesn't remove Auras."

It can't be targeted (the "Enchant creature" targets), but once it's there, Spectra Ward's text overrides the E of debt, allowing the aura to stay.
He was saying that he thinks things such as {Zur the Enchanter} don't get around {Spectra Ward}.
This was from Zur's rulings:

7/15/2006   If you use Zur the Enchanter's triggered ability to search for an Aura, it will be put onto the battlefield attached to an appropriate permanent. It doesn't target that permanent. If no appropriate permanent exists for it to be attached to, that Aura can't be put onto the battlefield and stays in your library.

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=121162

I'm not disagreeing that Zur gets around the targeting. What I'm saying is that protection prevents the creature from being enchanted in the first place. Read the ruling I posted again. There are two parts of the rule. The first says that it can't be enchanted. The second says any enchantments there fall off. Spectra ward only changes the rule for the second half, not the first.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Mr_Fahrenheit on August 23, 2014, 02:07:54 AM
I feel the need to point out that 'enchanting' a permanent is, in fact, targeting the permanent.

114.1b (http://imtgapp.com/forum/index.php?action=imtg;area=rule;number=114.1b): Aura spells are always targeted. These are the only permanent spells with targets. An Aura's target is specified by its enchant keyword ability (see rule 702.5, "Enchant"). The target(s) are chosen as the spell is cast; see rule 601.2c. An Aura permanent doesn't target anything; only the spell is targeted. (An activated or triggered ability of an Aura permanent can also be targeted.)

As it says an aura permanent doesn't target anything, only the spell is targeted. Therefore any means of getting an enchantment on something enchanted with {spectra ward} without explicitly casting it as a spell, would be a valid way of getting it on, including {zur the enchanter}, as the rulings state that the protection granted doesn't cause enchantments to fall off.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Mr_Fahrenheit on August 23, 2014, 02:16:32 AM
Not 100%  sure if that would override the 'debt' principle but that's my take on it, based on the rule I quoted.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Gorzo on August 23, 2014, 06:30:16 AM
casting an aura spell requires you to target a permanent. 100% of the time.

The reason that Zur and {Sun Titan} can get around targeting is because they bypass the casting part entirely. They use an ability that places the aura into play attached to Zur / a permanent (not casting, and not technically targeting)

Edit: As for {Spectra Ward} in this situation, it could HYPOTHETICALLY work to add new enchantments by "cheating" them into play with effects like Zur and Sun Titan. however, Ward's CMC is too high for either of those abilities to use on Spectra Ward. 3 or less, ward is 5.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Munchlax on August 23, 2014, 09:38:12 AM
Quote from: Gorzo on August 23, 2014, 06:30:16 AM
casting an aura spell requires you to target a permanent. 100% of the time.

The reason that Zur and {Sun Titan} can get around targeting is because they bypass the casting part entirely. They use an ability that places the aura into play attached to Zur / a permanent (not casting, and not technically targeting)

Edit: As for {Spectra Ward} in this situation, it could HYPOTHETICALLY work to add new enchantments by "cheating" them into play with effects like Zur and Sun Titan. however, Ward's CMC is too high for either of those abilities to use on Spectra Ward. 3 or less, ward is 5.
Well wouldn't it work with {Bruna light of Alabaster} then?
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Pleeb on August 23, 2014, 09:59:06 AM
Quote from: Gorzo on August 23, 2014, 06:30:16 AM
casting an aura spell requires you to target a permanent. 100% of the time
The reason that Zur and {Sun Titan} can get around targeting is because they bypass the casting part entirely. They use an ability that places the aura into play attached to Zur / a permanent (not casting, and not technically targeting)

Edit: As for {Spectra Ward} in this situation, it could HYPOTHETICALLY work to add new enchantments by "cheating" them into play with effects like Zur and Sun Titan. however, Ward's CMC is too high for either of those abilities to use on Spectra Ward. 3 or less, ward is 5.

We're not talking about using Zur to place the ward, but being able to place an enchantment on a creature with ward already in place. Zur and Titan don't care about the cmc of ward.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Remillo on August 23, 2014, 12:52:16 PM
After double-checking: You can, in fact, attach new auras to a creature with Spectra Ward by 'cheating' them on to the battlefield.  Spectra Ward basically turns DEBT in to DBT, meaning the creature is a legal choice to be enchanted.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Nymuera on August 23, 2014, 02:38:03 PM
Does it bypass the targeting for casting enchantments as well?
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Mattao19 on August 23, 2014, 04:33:54 PM
Quote from: Remillo on August 23, 2014, 12:52:16 PM
After double-checking: You can, in fact, attach new auras to a creature with Spectra Ward by 'cheating' them on to the battlefield.  Spectra Ward basically turns DEBT in to DBT, meaning the creature is a legal choice to be enchanted.

What if you cast normally?
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Pleeb on August 23, 2014, 05:01:05 PM
Quote from: Mattao19 on August 23, 2014, 04:33:54 PM
Quote from: Remillo on August 23, 2014, 12:52:16 PM
After double-checking: You can, in fact, attach new auras to a creature with Spectra Ward by 'cheating' them on to the battlefield.  Spectra Ward basically turns DEBT in to DBT, meaning the creature is a legal choice to be enchanted.

What if you cast normally?

You still can't target.
Title: Re: Spectra Ward Judge ruling, vs me
Post by: Mattao19 on August 23, 2014, 05:02:26 PM
Quote from: Pleeb on August 23, 2014, 05:01:05 PM
Quote from: Mattao19 on August 23, 2014, 04:33:54 PM
Quote from: Remillo on August 23, 2014, 12:52:16 PM
After double-checking: You can, in fact, attach new auras to a creature with Spectra Ward by 'cheating' them on to the battlefield.  Spectra Ward basically turns DEBT in to DBT, meaning the creature is a legal choice to be enchanted.

What if you cast normally?

You still can't target.

Ok sweet thanks