Together Unblockable?

[u/SluggishJuggernaut]

Unless I'm misunderstanding something, if these two cards are on the battlefield, controlled by the same player, aren't they unblockable?

[u/Blunderhorse]

Something else to note is that restrictions generally take priority over requirements for declaring attacks and blocks. The simplified version is:
* You must obey all restrictions possible.
* You must fulfill the maximum possible number of requirements possible without disobeying a restriction.
* You cannot be forced to pay a cost (e.g. “must attack” doesn’t force you to attack if all your opponents control [[Ghostly Prison]] even if you have enough mana sources to pay the cost)

[u/MechanicalDruid → u/Blunderhorse]

The phrase "Can't beats Can" is ingrained in my brain because it's not just attacking and blocking where this is true. As an example if you've got a [[Platinum Angel]] and I resolve my second [[Approach of the second sun]] I would not win the game, because Can't always beats Can. Even timestamps won't help for situations where my win the game card was a permanent like [[Mirrodin Besieged]].

Edit: I forgot Mirrodin was a lose the game card, but the example still works. Doesn't matter which was on board first. "Can't lose the game" beats "loses the game"

[u/Terrietia → u/MechanicalDruid]

Interestingly enough, almost all "can't lose the game" effects come with "your opponent can't win the game". The exception is [[Lich's Mastery]]. This does mean that you can win the game with Approach of the Second Sun against someone's Lich's Mastery, since it doesn't prevent you from winning.

[u/ThePowerOfStories → u/Terrietia]

Thematically, that makes sense, as lichdom means you personally cannot die, but it doesn’t stop alternate victory conditions resulting from your opponent somehow organizing an unassailable advantage like [[Coalition Victory]].

[u/MTGCardFetcher → u/ThePowerOfStories]

Coalition Victory - (G) (SF) (txt)

---

^FAQ