Fábio Batista

the typical is 2 pods of 3, but what about a 3 x two-headed-giant teams in a FFA?

They both apply, but only when attacking creatures have shadow! (609.4 & 609.4a). So dryad with web should be able to block an attacker that doesn't have shadow.

I don't think this works like that because rule 609.4 says that when pretending (as though) something is true in order to do something, that we only apply to the stated effect, so the creature doesn't actually lose abilities

But the "pretends" part of Heartwood Dryad only applies to attacking creatures with shadow, so Heartwood Dryad with Aether Web attached, can block a creature without shadow, right?

Or to put it in other perspective: How can we recognize that set of Actions (or keyword actions) can be processed simultaneously? The CR doesn't provide in this regard... Help! :)

@wotcmatt.bsky.social I have a memory of a post on other letter social network website:
- "For each ... investigate" / "incubate N times"- it's known it resolves sequentially, so it's not able to be processed simultaneously as per 608.2f. Why is that?
- "For each .. create a .." is simultaneous?

Also, if an opponent controls an Alms Collector, that means it will be able to see more than 1 card attempting to be drawn and replace it! Neat!

Great! One final question: When resolving tempt with vengeance, is the game capable of simultaneous creating 3 times X tokens? The same way its capable of simultaneously creating 3 times "a token" ?

What if the effect created multiple kinds of token, would it also work ? (except investigate ofc)

what about the other tempt with... spells? how can we as judges have a general rule of thumb to recognize if an effect can be "clumped" and resolve the "for each" all at once vs not?

thanks for the reply!! Because of the draw i thought you had to (draw a card, create rabbit) for each opponent sequentially since you draw one card at a time.

This is wild since the gatherer ruling (for all tempt with...) is a bit misleading when we compare to the the ruling on Tempting Offer.

another issue that i see with lower brackets, is that saying "no mass land destruction" and allowing board-wipes for artifact mana or creature mana, makes land-ramp based decks unfairly unpunishable. I'm not sure how to fix that, though :/

re.: lower brackets:

- i'd love to see an integration with commanderspellbook to help with the "combo detection" ;)

re.: upper brackets:

- the difference between 4 and 5 seems to be purely a mindset one. Player-based, not deck-based, yeah? However, players can also compete in lower brackets!