I’ve one other query that highlights the significance of appropriately wording card textual content and/or the necessity to learn the textual content of earlier editions of many Magic playing cards (and never solely the obtainable Oracle Textual content).
Let’s suppose Lively Participant has a Wardscale Dragon in play from a number of turns, and it is the one creature in play.
It is the draw part, and instantly after drawing the cardboard, the Defending participant –
who has 4 life remaining solely –
decides to play his final Magic card:
particularly, a reprint from one of many more moderen units.
Defending participant is aware of completely the textual content of the White Dragon card the Lively participant owns, and due to this fact hopes to save lots of himself by casting Fog earlier than the Assault part,with a purpose to keep away from it,since he cannot solid no extra spells throughout the assault part
(earlier than harm is assigned).
He believes all the things is okay, as a result of the latest card textual content does not point out the necessity to solid Fog throughout the Assault part.
So, he tries to forestall any harm whereas additionally evading the safety from spells supplied to Lively Participant by the White Dragon.
The Lively participant, nonetheless, reveals to the Defending Participant a Fog card from the very early Magic units, which clearly states {that a} Participant should:
- “play [Fog] any time earlier than assault harm is dealt.”
This outdated card textual content admits that Fog must be solid throughout the Assault Section (earlier than harm is assigned).
The defending participant, nonetheless, nonetheless complains, mentioning the whole absence of a selected Fog Ruling in its newest reprints.
Lastly, my query clearly finally ends up with this:
-“Who is correct?”
Thanks a lot.
