Fhyujk

Why is "points exist" not an axiom in geometry?

Program that converts a number to a letter of the alphabet

How can animals be objects of ethics without being subjects as well?

How do you funnel food off a cutting board?

How can I deliver in-universe written lore to players without it being dry exposition?

What's a good word to describe a public place that looks like it wouldn't be rough?

Pandas: How to group by a value in column when there is list in one of the columns

Eww, those bytes are gross

Why did other German political parties disband so fast when Hitler was appointed chancellor?

Is there any other number that has similar properties as 21?

How to prevent cleaner from hanging my lock screen in Ubuntu 16.04

Publishing research using outdated methods

Roman Numerals equation 1

Book where aliens are selecting humans for food consumption

Who is this Ant Woman character in this image alongside the Wasp?

Error in a formula field

How to avoid being sexist when trying to employ someone to function in a very sexist environment?

Am I a Rude Number?

Why did the villain in the first Men in Black movie care about Earth's Cockroaches?

Difference between `vector<int> v;` and `vector<int> v = vector<int>();`

how to acknowledge an embarrasing job interview, now that I work directly with the interviewer?

What is the purpose of easy combat scenarios that don't need resource expenditure?

Why are the books in the Game of Thrones citadel library shelved spine inwards?

Highly technological aliens land nuclear fusion powered ships in medieval city and slaughter everyone, using swords?

Can making a creature unable to attack, after it has been assigned as an attacker, remove it from combat?

What happens if a blocking creature with flying loses flying?Unleash UnleashedCan Act of Treason allow a Detained creature to attack?Can I steal a creature then block my own attack with it?How much damage do I deal? (How is damage dealt if an attacker gains power as combat damage is being assigned?)Does first strike damage occur before normal damage?Can I play blessed alliance after damage resolves to make him sac a creature I didn't kill?Is there a term for defensive effects that only/primarily function for attacking creatures?Can I give a creature spell hexproof to prevent it from being countered?MTG: Creature can't attack unless X after “declare attackers”Can a Thallid create saprolings at end of combat phase and still kill attacker

8

1

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?

magic-the-gathering

share|improve this question

edited 25 mins ago

Glorfindel

4,85611338

asked 18 hours ago

BillBill

40218

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Related: boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/7343/…
  
  – GendoIkari
  18 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @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
  18 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  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
  17 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  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
  17 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  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
  16 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

8

1

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?

magic-the-gathering

share|improve this question

edited 25 mins ago

Glorfindel

4,85611338

asked 18 hours ago

BillBill

40218

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Related: boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/7343/…
  
  – GendoIkari
  18 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @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
  18 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  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
  17 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  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
  17 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  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
  16 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

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?

magic-the-gathering

share|improve this question

edited 25 mins ago

Glorfindel

4,85611338

asked 18 hours ago

BillBill

40218

share|improve this question

edited 25 mins ago

Glorfindel

4,85611338

asked 18 hours ago

BillBill

40218

share|improve this question

edited 25 mins ago

Glorfindel

4,85611338

asked 18 hours ago

BillBill

40218

edited 25 mins ago

Glorfindel

4,85611338

edited 25 mins ago

Glorfindel

4,85611338

asked 18 hours ago

BillBill

40218

asked 18 hours ago

BillBill

40218

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

13

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.

share|improve this answer

edited 17 hours ago

doppelgreener

16.1k858122

answered 18 hours ago

MalcoMalco

6,6961454

add a comment | 

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.

share|improve this answer

answered 16 hours ago

AndrewAndrew

5,279838

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  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
  9 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "147"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fboardgames.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45341%2fcan-making-a-creature-unable-to-attack-after-it-has-been-assigned-as-an-attacke%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

13

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.

share|improve this answer

edited 17 hours ago

doppelgreener

16.1k858122

answered 18 hours ago

MalcoMalco

6,6961454

add a comment | 

13

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.

share|improve this answer

edited 17 hours ago

doppelgreener

16.1k858122

answered 18 hours ago

MalcoMalco

6,6961454

add a comment | 

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.

share|improve this answer

edited 17 hours ago

doppelgreener

16.1k858122

answered 18 hours ago

MalcoMalco

6,6961454

share|improve this answer

edited 17 hours ago

doppelgreener

16.1k858122

answered 18 hours ago

MalcoMalco

6,6961454

edited 17 hours ago

doppelgreener

16.1k858122

edited 17 hours ago

doppelgreener

16.1k858122

answered 18 hours ago

MalcoMalco

6,6961454

answered 18 hours ago

MalcoMalco

6,6961454

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.

share|improve this answer

answered 16 hours ago

AndrewAndrew

5,279838

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  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
  9 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

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.

share|improve this answer

answered 16 hours ago

AndrewAndrew

5,279838

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  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
  9 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

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.

share|improve this answer

answered 16 hours ago

AndrewAndrew

5,279838

share|improve this answer

answered 16 hours ago

AndrewAndrew

5,279838

answered 16 hours ago

AndrewAndrew

5,279838

answered 16 hours ago

AndrewAndrew

5,279838