10

If an Aura is placed on the battlefield using Genesis Wave or an ability like Sun Titan's, can it enchant a creature that has shroud (or an opponent-controlled creature with hexproof)?

I'm looking at these rules specifically:

303.4a An Aura spell requires a target, which is restricted by its enchant ability.

303.4f If an Aura is entering the battlefield under a player’s control by any means other than by resolving as an Aura spell, and the effect putting it onto the battlefield doesn’t specify the object or player the Aura will enchant, that player chooses what it will enchant as the Aura enters the battlefield. The player must choose a legal object or player according to the Aura’s enchant ability and any other applicable effects.

702.17a Shroud is a static ability. “Shroud” means “This permanent or player can’t be the target of spells or abilities.”

| improve this question | |
  • This question/answer was very confusing until I realized you wered casting the Aura. – Origami Robot Feb 14 '12 at 13:50
9

Yes, they may. The cards you mentioned returned those Auras to the battlefield, so only 303.4 applies here. It should also be notes that the aura must enchant a legal object (i.e. Auras with "enchant player" must enchant players, auras with "enchant a creature you control" cannot enchant noncreatures and cannot enchant opponents creatures, etc)

Aura spells (i.e. Cards cast from your hand, and added to the stack), do require a target. It is unfortunate that they are the only spells that target, without "target" within the rules text.

| improve this answer | |
  • Note the full text, though: "legal object or player according to the Aura’s enchant ability and any other applicable effects". So I can't, for instance, return Dead Weight to the battlefield enchanting Mirran Crusader even though it doesn't "target". – Alex P Feb 14 '12 at 17:05
5

Yes, they certainly can. In fact this is a famous counterintuitive loophole (or we can be polite and call it a "quirk") remaining in the tidied-up modern rules.

ETA: Initially I thought an Aura might even be able to come into play attached to a creature with Protection from that Aura's colour (before falling off again as a state-based effect). This is not in fact true: protection represents a complete inability to be enchanted by Auras of the stated quality. So the lesson here is, if you want to make sure your hexproof/shroud creatures really can't be sneakily enchanted by Auras, give them protection from as many of your opponent's colours as possible too. The belt-and-braces approach!

Here's a fun question for you in return: if Genesis Wave puts Fist of Ironwood onto the battlefield when it has no creatures to enchant, do you get to put two 1/1 Saprolings into play? Actually I'm going to have to go and ask this question immediately because I'm not 100% sure of the answer :)

| improve this answer | |
  • I don't think protection allows you to attach it at all: "The player must choose a legal object or player according to the Aura’s enchant ability and any other applicable effects." – Alex P Feb 13 '12 at 7:37
  • I thought that too, but if so then explain 702.15c: A permanent or player with protection can't be enchanted by Auras that have the stated quality. Such Auras attached to the permanent or player with protection will be put into their owners' graveyards as a state-based action. (See rule 704, "State-Based Actions.") ? – thesunneversets Feb 13 '12 at 7:39
  • I believe that's the "Faith's Shield = enchantment removal" clause. – Alex P Feb 13 '12 at 8:08
  • Aha, that makes sense! I'll reconsider and edit my answer as appropriate :) – thesunneversets Feb 13 '12 at 8:11

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.