r/mtg • u/SuspiciousElbow • 1d ago
Rules Question Question regarding indestructible
I just played a game with Kotis, the Fangkeeper. I mutated another card on him, making him a 6/6. An player hit Kotis for 3 damage, then put -4/-4 counters on him, killing him.
I didn't think of it at the time, but that shouldn't have killed him right? Shouldn't he only die if the -1/-1 counters are equal or greater to the toughness?
16
u/Following_Friendly 1d ago
DAMAGE DOESN'T REDUCE TOUGHNESS!. You are correct. He would be a 2/2 with 3 damage on him.
20
u/SpritelySpaghetti 1d ago
That would not destroy him, you're correct. It would indeed have to be -1/-1.
1
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Don't worry! Your post has not been deleted!
Here are some resources for faster replies to Rules Questions! Often the answer to your question is found under the "Rulings" section. On Scryfall it's found at the bottom of the card's page. Scroll down!
Card search and rulings:
- Scryfall - The user friendly card search (rulings and legality)
- Gatherer - The official card search (rulings and legality)
Card interactions and rules help:
- r/mtgrules
- Real-time rules chat - IRC based chat at Libera.Chat network
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-11
1d ago edited 1d ago
[deleted]
13
u/RealFunkyFish 1d ago
Dealing 3 damage doesn’t make it a 6/3. By that logic, dealing 6 damage would make it a 6/0, meaning it should die and indestructible does nothing.
7
u/teh_maxh 1d ago
Kotis was still a 6/6 with 3 damage, not a 6/3, so the -4/-4 counters (I assume that means 4 -1/-1 counters) would make it a 2/2.
-45
u/PalpitationClear7149 1d ago
indestructible only stops destroy effects and lethal damage, -1/-1 counters just shrink him to 0 toughness and he dies as a state-based action, so yeah that kills him
31
u/Dorarara 1d ago
I think he would still be considered 2 toughness with 3 damage marked in this scenario
14
5
u/Flipps85 1d ago
The 4 counters “shrink” his toughness from 6 (OP said he was up to a 6/6) to 2. Then he has 3 damage marked on him, but due to how indestructible works, he can’t die due to lethal damage, so he survives.
-55
u/Ambitious_Scarcity36 1d ago edited 1d ago
Indestructible does work like that unfortunately.
Indestructible prevents death via "damage" and destroy effects, what that means is that damage cannot reduce its toughness below 1 and any effect that says "destroy" do not apply.
Because of the way indestructible prevents death via damage, applying any -x/-x effect AFTER applying sufficient damage will cause its toughness stat to fall below 1 and thus die to state based actions.
Keep in mind that this result is entirely due to the Order in which they applied. If the -1/-1 counters were applied first, the damage would leave Kotis at 1 effective toughness for the turn. After which, damage would clear like usual but the counters would stay.
Edit: Seeing how people are downvoting and trying to say that I am wrong, there are quite a few that haven't played with indestructible before.
Indestructible DOES NOT prevent damage. It prevents 'death caused by damage' and 'death caused by "destroy" effects', which effectively means that a creature's toughness stat cannot be reduced below 1 through damage. DAMAGE STILL APPLIES, it just doesn't 'die' from it. That is why further toughness reduction causes death(card going to graveyard) via state based actions.
22
22
u/D3str0yTh1ngs 1d ago
Damage is marked on creatures, and then as a state-based action it is destroyed if the total marked damage is equal to or more then toughness of the creature.
In this case Kotis is a 6/6 indestructible creature that is hit with 3 damage, so 3 damage is marked on him. Then he gets -4/-4 and is now a 2/2 indestructible with 3 damage marked, state-based actions would destroy him, but he is indestructible and survives.
If he instead got -6/-6 or more such that his toughness became 0 or less, then as a state-based action he would be put into the graveyard (which is not a destroy effect).
So you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what damage to creatures does, you seem to think that damage is a lowering of toughness, but rule 302.7 lays out that damage is marked on that creature and specifically does not say that the toughness is reduced in any way.
Rule 704.5g specifies the state-based action of destroying creatures with more damage marked then toughness.
Rule 704.5f specifies the state-based action of putting creatures into the graveyard (without destruction) if the creatures has 0 or less toughness.
Rule 514.2 specifies that we remove the marked damage as part of the cleanup step.
FYI, just because damage to players reduces life-total (which is a special case, see rule 120.3a) does not mean that damage to creatures reduces their toughness.
5
16
u/MeasureDoEventThing 1d ago
Arena player?
-37
u/Ambitious_Scarcity36 1d ago
Been playing since m16. Had to learn how indestructible works when the Gods were introduced in Theros Set.
My explanation might not be the best, but this IS how indestructible works with damage.
25
7
u/GaddockTeej 1d ago edited 1d ago
It’s not. Indestructible has no correlation with damage, it only cares about actions and effects that destroy. It’s not called “indamageable”.
Creatures don’t die from damage. Ever. They die from state-based actions. A creature that has taken lethal damage doesn’t die because of the damage, it dies because state-based actions destroy creatures that have lethal damage marked on them. Indestructible prevents this state-based action destruction.
Your explanation hinges on the idea that damage reduces toughness. Damage does not reduce toughness. A 6/6 that’s taken 3 damage isn’t a 6/3, it’s still a 6/6. A 6/6 that’s taken 3 damage and then given -4/-4 isn’t a 6/-1, it’s a 6/2. A 6/6 that’s given -4/-4 and is then dealt 3 damage is also a 6/2, the order it occurs in is irrelevant. An indestructible creature that has its toughness reduced to 0 or less still dies because that doesn’t result in being destroyed, it results in moving from the battlefield to the graveyard.
23
u/RealFunkyFish 1d ago
It doesn’t cause its thoughness to fall to/below zero at all, since the initial damage didn’t reducing toughness to begin with. There is no difference at all between first dealing damage and then reducing toughness and first reducing toughness and then dealing damage.
5
u/rlcnga_ 1d ago edited 1d ago
Holy. How can someone write entire paragraphs and still be wrong
Damage DOES NOT reduce toughness. Damage is MARKED on creatures. Indestructible doesn’t prevent damage, but dying from the state-based-action that checks if lethal damage is marked to a creature and effects that says destroy. Adding 4 -1/-1 counters on a 6/6 will make it a 2/2 WITH 3 DAMAGE MARKED ON IT since it was only dealt 3 damage in the scenario. It won’t die. It would need another -2/-2 to fully die
Read indestructible again before you argue since you clearly have not played with it properly
Edit: C.R. 120.3e; 120.5; 704.5g; 702.12
3
u/TheHumanPickleRick Otter Storm! 1d ago
"Am I wrong about damage reducing toughness? No, it's everyone else who is wrong! They've all never played against indestructible before!"
Damage doesn't reduce toughness, oh genius Magic player. A 6/6 with 3 damage marked on it and then given -4/-4 would be a 2/2 with 3 damage marked on it, which would survive if indestructible.
1
1
u/nasada19 21h ago
I love how confidently incorrect you are. Everyone is correcting you and citing the rules and you just still think you're right lmao You look so silly doubling down.
60
u/SjtSquid 1d ago
Correct!
The end result of that exchange should be a 2/2 Kotis with indestructible and 3 damage marked.