Wild Beastmaster

[Disciple of the Old Ways]

So heres the situation, one {wild beastmaster} attacks with another {wild beastmaster} and a few other creatures, what happens?

[Coffee Vampire]

When both are declared as attackers (which happens at the same time), two beastmaster triggers go on the stack. It looks like this:

TOP
---
Beastmaster #1
Beastmaster #2
---
BOTTOM

The top resolves first. The beastmaster #1's power is 1, so beastmaster #2 gets +1/+1. Now only the beastmaster #2 trigger is on the stack. It looks like this:

TOP
---
Beastmaster #2
---
BOTTOM

Beastmaster #2's power is 2 now, because of the first's trigger. So your other beastmaster gets +2/+2.

So after all is said and done, you will have a 3/3 beastmaster and a 2/2 beastmaster. If you have any other creatures, those creatures will all get +3/+3.

RESOLVED

[Disciple of the Old Ways]

Thanks

[Wally]

Wait. Won't all the other creatures get +5/+5?

[Gorzo]

Wait. Won't all the other creatures get +5/+5?

Nope, cv has it correct. They will recieve +1 from the first Beastmaster trigger, and +2 from the second. Total of +3.

It gets super confusing as you add more {Wild Beastmaster}s.

[Wally]

Ahh I misread. Thanks for the clarification.

[AwaySinceMirage]

Venturing out to my first FNM tomorrow. Do I understand my cards correctly?

One {Wild Beastmaster} and two other creatures. I declare all three attack. WB is at 1/1 but her trigger goes on a stack, unresolved.

I play a bloodrusher as a fast effect in response to my own trigger, namely {Scorchwalker}. This resolves first and WB goes to 6/2.

Then she resolves and my other two attackers get +6/+6 not +1/+1.

Do I have that right?

[MisterJH]

No you must bloodrush before declaring attackers, {wild beastmaster} specifies WHEN IT ATTACKS, so if the beastmaster is a 1/1 when declared an attacker, all other creatures get +1/+1 i do believe. Correct me if im wrong.

[MisterJH]

The reason why is the state of the beastmaster is checked upon declaration of attacker, and that check is what is placed on the stack.. I think .

[AwaySinceMirage]

Hmm. {Scorchwalker} targets an attacking creature, so I figured I needed to declare her as such first. Then I would get priority and that bloodrush is at instant speed, so they would stack.

<hand up> Judge!?

[MisterJH]

Thats the thing, i wouldnt think you could use bloodrush is such a way.. :/

[AwaySinceMirage]

Excellent discussion JH, thank you!
I'm plunging back into the rulebook now...unfortunately bloodrush has no legal definition so its ramifications aren't to be found all grouped together anywhere...but as a simple activated ability belonging to {Scorchwalker} I'm trying to finesse it as a response on a stack. Then there's the whole X thing and when does X lock in, on activation, on trigger, or on resolution.
My last trip into the rules weeds was with Stuffy Doll and I was totally wrong. Ready to be wrong yet again.

[Vyse]

You can in fact respond to her trigger, use a blood rush effect, and bolster her as far as I know

[AwaySinceMirage]

and does she pass it on through her X=6 if it resolves right after that?
I found rule 107.3c, activated abilities with X defined in the text. ("value of X can change while on the stack"). Hers is a triggered ability rather than an activated ability, but that's the closest rule I've found so far about X-in-text (which is not the same concept as X-in-cost).
Thanks!