8

Kulrath Knight has an effect that states 'Creatures your opponents control with counters on them can't attack or block.' So a creature is assigned as an attacker and subsequently gets a counter placed on it prior to combat resolution, does that remove the creature from combat?

  • 1
  • @GendoIkari close-enough that it might be a dupe, but this one is specifically asking about attacking and not blocking so I figured it was worth an answer. Plus there is clean/clear rule in CR so why not. – Malco Feb 28 at 18:45
  • 2
    @Malco Yeah I don't think it's a duplicate; although there could easily be another question that these could then be both duplicates of. But unless this same basic question pops up a few more times in a few more forms; I don't think there's a need for such a question. – GendoIkari Feb 28 at 19:28
  • 1
    A -1/-1 counter can remove a creature from combat (by killing it), but I suspect that that's not what you meant. – Arcanist Lupus Feb 28 at 19:59
  • 2
    @ArcanistLupus It's the interaction with Kulrath Knight's ability "Creatures your opponents control with counters on them can't attack or block." that Bill is referring to, asking if making a creature unable to attack after it was declared as attacking invalidates and reverses that attack (I think it does in YuGiOh and causes confusion for players coming from that game) – Andrew Feb 28 at 20:13
14

No, making a creature "unable to attack or block" after attackers have been declared does not remove it from combat.

An ability that says "Creatures can't Attack or Block" means that they can not be declared as blockers or attackers. If they are already attacking or blocking it is too late and they will not be removed from combat.

506.4a: Once a creature has been declared as an attacking or blocking creature, spells or abilities that would have kept that creature from attacking or blocking don't remove the creature from combat.

3

No, creatures that are already declared as attacking (or blocking) are not removed from combat because they could no longer be legally declared as an attacker or blocker. That is only checked when declaring the attack or block, and never again for that combat. This is covered by the comprehensive rules(Emphasis mine):

506.4a Once a creature has been declared as an attacking or blocking creature, spells or abilities that would have kept that creature from attacking or blocking don't remove the creature from combat.

There are effects that will remove a creature from combat, these though all specifically say they do so, on cards like Maze of Ith, Reconnaissance or Illusionist's Gambit. The ways that a creature CAN be removed from combat are spelled out here:

506.4 A permanent is removed from combat if it leaves the battlefield, if its controller changes, if it phases out, if an effect specifically removes it from combat, if it's a planeswalker that's being attacked and stops being a planeswalker, or if it's an attacking or blocking creature that regenerates (see rule 701.14) or stops being a creature. A creature that's removed from combat stops being an attacking, blocking, blocked, and/or unblocked creature. A planeswalker that's removed from combat stops being attacked.

There are also effects that can get around combat restrictions, usually effects that force a creature into play tapped and attacking, this lets you get around effects like Ensnaring Bridge with bigger ninjas, like Ink-Eyes, Servant of Oni, or past effects like Crawlspace by creating tokens when attacking with Hero of Bladehold or Tilonalli's Summoner. If an effect causes creatures to enter with a counter, say Rhythm of the Wild it will also bypass Kulrath Knight that turn.

  • Time Stop does not explicitly say it removes creatures from combat (and the foil hilariously lacks all of the "reminder" text entirely), but since there's no other logically reasonable interpretation of the card, there is a ruling to that effect. – Kevin Mar 1 at 3:29
  • @Kevin It is interesting that they specifically mention it happening before state-based actions are checked. If they hadn't, then creatures would still be removed from combat when the combat step ends, but state-based actions would not be checked again before the cleanup step. I haven't found any cards for which this would make a difference though. – Fax Mar 1 at 15:22
  • @Kevin it does however move the game out of the combat step, so I'd say it less removes the creature from combat as causes that combat to cease to exist. – Andrew Mar 1 at 15:45
  • 1
    Time Stop's text is just reminder text, it does not list everything that happens. There is a full section of the rules (716) that describes how ending the turn works. And in fact 716.1b explicitly says "Remove all creatures and planeswalkers from combat" – murgatroid99 Mar 1 at 22:01

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.