1

If Angelic Wall (0/4) blocks a creature with a power of 5, would Angelic Wall die? My brother is playing Magic 2013 on his iPad, and basically when his creatures with Defender (the ability) blocks a stronger creature, the defenders never die.

I keep telling him they do die in the actual card game but every reference I find just says they do not attack but not whether or not they die. His reasoning is that they just absorb damage to lessen the affect of trample, for example.

|improve this question
  • I edited your post a fair amount, including replacing some of the terminology you used, which could have been causing some confusion. For example, creatures don't attack each other - creatures attack a player (or planeswalker) and that player's creatures block, then the creatures deal damage to each other. Creatures with Defender can't attack - but they do deal damage equal to their power just like everything else. – Cascabel♦ May 30 '13 at 17:14
  • I also guessed that the iPad game is Duels of the Planeswalkers 2013, which was developed by Stainless Games - hopefully that's right! (And I'd be really surprised if that game doesn't use the rules correctly...) – Cascabel♦ May 30 '13 at 17:14
  • Thank you for the clarification and edits. Yes, he called me the other day basically saying he kept blocking stronger creatures with his wall that had "defender" ability but his creature never died and vice versa with the computers defender enabled creatures. It didn't sound right to me though as I understood only creatures which state they are indestructible can not die. – Damainman May 30 '13 at 17:48
  • 2
    Well, if you can get a specific example from him, it'd make a reasonable rules question here. Otherwise I guess all we can do is speculate - maybe it was a Fog Bank! – Cascabel♦ May 30 '13 at 18:01
  • I'd be amazed if your brother wasn't playing with Fog Banks. Which have a special reason for not dying when blocking a big creature, unrelated to their having Defender. – thesunneversets Jun 4 '13 at 10:48
4

The short: Yes any creature that suffers leathal damage 'dies' including those with Defender.

A wall as they were previously known, is a creature with defender.

If it takes 5 damage it is destroyed.(Dies)

Rule 119 all parts but this one in particular:

119.5. Damage dealt to a creature or planeswalker doesn't destroy it. Likewise, the source of that damage doesn't destroy it. Rather, state-based actions may destroy a creature or planeswalker, or otherwise put it into its owner's graveyard, due to the results of the damage dealt to that permanent. See rule 704.

And the state based action is what sends the creature to the grave yard:

704.5g If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.

And Defender:

702.3. Defender

702.3a Defender is a static ability.

702.3b A creature with defender can't attack.

702.3c Multiple instances of defender on the same creature are redundant.

So a 'Defender' is simply a creature with an ability. Any creature that has damage marked on it that is greater than it's toughness, is destroyed as a state based action.

|improve this answer
  • Awesome thanks! Is 119.5 basically saying that damage does not destroy a creature unless it is more damage than the creature has toughness? That rule is confusing me a bit. Also do you know where I can get these rules from? – Damainman May 30 '13 at 14:55
  • 1
    the comprehensive rules can be donwloaded in four diffrernt formats form the wizards web site. 119 basically is just drawing the distinction that damage is not what destroys a creature, the state based action which looks for damaged creatures with damage equal to or exceeding their toughness is what destroys the creature. I am not sure why they needed this distinction but they have it. – Pow-Ian May 30 '13 at 15:00
  • Thank you for the link. My and my brother are new to the game. Not quite sure what "state based action" is referring to but I will try to figure it out. Thanks again for your comprehensive asnwer :) – Damainman May 30 '13 at 15:02
  • 2
    well I would not suggest diving into the comprehensive rules yet then. Use them as a means to solve arguments or figure out really sticky situations. For now play as much as you can using 'basic' rules and get a firm understanding. The Comprehensive rules can be ver dense and intimidating especially to new players. – Pow-Ian May 30 '13 at 15:08
  • 1
    @Damainman but also welcome to the site and feel free to bring questions here if you get stumped! – Gregor May 30 '13 at 20:30

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.