There are a lot of cards that have the effect

Target permanent does not untap during next untap step

For example:Kashi-Tribe Elite and Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger.

Is there a term for this? Because it's kind of a mouthful to say "that permanent is not allowed to untap during the next untap step."

  • The simple answer is no. I'm just not sure if there is really more to add to that. Except maybe a reason from WotC if someone can find it.
    – SocioMatt
    Apr 10 '13 at 12:32
  • 1
    Maybe there is an unofficial term like Trollshroud was used before WotC named it hexproof. Or maybe is the SE mtg community big enough to coin the the term! Apr 10 '13 at 12:38
  • 6
    If we're going to coin terms, I'm voting for "Exhausted." That creature is exhausted; it doesn't untap because it can't do anything. Alternatives if "Exhausted" is actually under copyright because of Vs.: depleted, crippled, or enervated.
    – SocioMatt
    Apr 10 '13 at 12:43
  • 1
    I actually wouldn't mind exhausted for lands or other permanents. One of the common uses is "exhausted resources," which is what every card in MtG represents. They are resources that are meant to help you cast spells and defeat your opponents.
    – SocioMatt
    Apr 10 '13 at 13:38
  • 1
    If you don't think mountains get exhausted, try being a mountain for a day!! Sure they only move a micrometer a day, but for a mountain, it's a lot of work!
    – corsiKa
    Apr 11 '13 at 16:13

No, there is no official term for it.

If you want a term to use casually, then I suggest Paralyzed (a la Paralyzing Grasp or Paralyze).

I also like the suggested term exhausted (Exhaustion), tangled (Tangle) or sleeping (Sleep).

  • The term "exhaustion" seems to be favored as answer as well in the comment section. no sure if i can tag anything as answer since there is no correct answer... Apr 11 '13 at 9:09
  • 2
    @SirDuckduck The 'correct' answer is no. You should accept whatever answer contains that and you find most helpful.
    – Colin D
    Apr 11 '13 at 12:00
  • The first three are good, because they can be used both as an action and a state, e.g. "I paralyze your creature" "nooooo it's paralyzed". ("Tangle" isn't quite as nice as the other two, but still works.) But sleep is awkward - "I put your creature to sleep"? "I sleep your creature"? In any case, +1, coining names based on existing cards is definitely the de facto convention.
    – Cascabel
    Apr 11 '13 at 14:56
  • Another idea appropriated from card effect that I've heard used is "frozen" or "iced" (think Wall of Frost, Frost Titan, Crippling Chill).
    – ryanyuyu
    Jul 6 '17 at 14:42

Short answer, "no". Long answer, "noooooooooo".

However, in casual games I [personally] tend to use the term "locked" or "locked down" if something doesn't untap during untap phases at all.

As SocioMatt suggested in the comments, "exhausted" would be a good turn for a single-hit of this on creatures. For permanents in general, you could say "delayed" - or for flavour representing disruption of a player's magical link to their permanent, something along the lines of "obscured" or "tangled".

  • we use locked down in our circle as well.
    – Pow-Ian
    Apr 10 '13 at 15:36
  • We use "Sleeping" because Sleep is the card with that effect that we use the most.
    – GendoIkari
    Apr 10 '13 at 17:57

I'm not sue of its legality in tournaments, but in casual play, my area usually calls this "Super-tapped" and often turn the card upside down to represent it being essentially "tapped twice". (assuming tapped is turning the card 90 degrees. Super-tapped would mean turning it 180 degrees.)

However I cant think of an official name for this. Also as you can see there are plenty of informal names for this action.

  • 2
    I personally turn them 135 degrees to differentiate between flip cards, as well as making it more easy to see at a glance and not to forget about anything while untapping. Apr 11 '17 at 14:51
  • @TheThirdMan that is a very valid point however, there are a select few people i play from time to time who forget to untap creatures and artifacts regardless of situation... XD Apr 11 '17 at 16:46

As of Amonkhet, there is now a mechanic that causes an attacking creature to not untap during its controller's next untap step. It is called exert (http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/feature/amonkhet-mechanics-2017-04-03).

However, I usually refered to it as sleeping, freezing or being frozen as those are the flavor effects of the blue cards that inflict this condition in recent sets.

  • 3
    Exert doesn't seem relevant, as I'm unlikely refer to these effects as having "exerted" a card -- it doesn't seem intuitive and it confuses with an entirely separate mechanic. Apr 10 '17 at 8:19
  • 1
    I'm positive that "exert" will be the exact keyword the OP is looking for. For me "Exert target permanent" is bot intuitive and natural. Limiting the "exert " keyword only to creatures or only to attackers would be just that - limiting with no upsides. If we can regenerate any permanent and not just creatures, than we should be able to exert any permanent and not just creatures.
    – tsuma534
    Apr 11 '17 at 9:53
  • 2
    @tsuma534 and PetrHudeček: The problem is that exerting is an action, while a permanent not untapping is a "status" of the permanent. Furthermore, exerting refers to specifically choosing not to have the permanent untap while declaring it as an attacker. Using exerting as a synonym for a creature not untapping could lead to false assumptions in both directions. Apr 11 '17 at 14:55
  • 2
    I agree that this doesn't make sense. Exert has more to it, in flavour and mechanics. Exert is a choice to make when attacking, and the use of "exert" as a word is there to convey the creature pushing itself to get a bit more. The word has to do with putting in effort, and exhaustion is a consequence. If you're gonna start "exerting" my creatures, I'm gonna ask what I get from it.
    – Samthere
    Apr 11 '17 at 16:13
  • 1
    @Samthere and Thirdman it's possible that you're right. But in the version you're proposing exert is very limited. in the version I hope for, exert works identically for the previewed cards as in your version BUT it can also be used in any situation where a permanent doesn't untap during it's controller's next untap step. The exert mechanics you're proposing have no upsides over the exert mechanics I hope for. I don't see why Wizards would limit themselves when they can introduce a new evergreen keyword for a status that's around for years. Time will tell who guessed right.
    – tsuma534
    Apr 12 '17 at 11:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.