I’ve one other query that highlights the significance of accurately 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 Energetic 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 Energetic participant owns, and due to this fact hopes to avoid wasting himself by casting Fog earlier than the Assault part,so as to keep away from it,since he cannot forged no extra spells in the course of the assault part
(earlier than harm is assigned).
He believes the whole lot is okay, as a result of the current card textual content would not point out the necessity to forged Fog in the course of the Assault part.
So, he tries to stop any harm whereas additionally evading the safety from spells supplied to Energetic Participant by the White Dragon.
The Energetic participant, nevertheless, 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 previous card textual content admits that Fog needs to be forged in the course of the Assault Section (earlier than harm is assigned).
The defending participant, nevertheless, 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.
