MTG Wiki

Diff selection: Mark the radio buttons of the revisions to compare and hit enter or the button at the bottom.
Legend: (cur) = difference with latest revision, (prev) = difference with preceding revision, m = minor edit.

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

21 April 2023

4 September 2022

  • curprev 19:2019:20, 4 September 2022Jerodast talk contribs 8,883 bytes −20 Rephrased Bounty of Might example so readers don't need to look at the full card to understand the idea. undo Tag: Source edit
  • curprev 18:5618:56, 4 September 2022Jerodast talk contribs 8,903 bytes +205 Rephrased to clarify that enchant, among MANY others, is a keyword ability whose rules describe targeting. As the page said, the word may appear in either the card text or in the definition of keyword abilities on the card, but rephrased to emphasize this further. While "enchant" is a rather complex keyword, it is not an exception to anything stated here, but it is a good example. Used 4 example keywords to get a broad range of keyword types that all invoke targeting rules. undo

1 August 2022

  • curprev 16:1916:19, 1 August 2022Nave711 talk contribsm 8,698 bytes +27 I added enchant as as a targeted ability, as the page said that a targeted spell is *always* indicated by the word target, which is not true in the case of enchantments. undo Tags: Visual edit Mobile edit Mobile web edit

24 July 2022

23 July 2022

15 March 2022

10 March 2022

8 February 2022

31 December 2021

  • curprev 04:2904:29, 31 December 2021Jerodast talk contribs 7,872 bytes +124 Argh, and now I come full circle and realize that pointing out the relationship between countering and fizzling was there originally as its own related mechanic, and was much clearer when there weren't a whole bunch of interactions all piling up, alas. Maybe THIS is the right way to group together the different forms of fizzling while still letting them have their own space and without losing that point about fizzling/counters in general? undo Tag: Source edit
  • curprev 03:2003:20, 31 December 2021Jerodast talk contribs 7,748 bytes +22 May as well say WHO it was chosen by undo Tag: Source edit
  • curprev 03:1303:13, 31 December 2021Jerodast talk contribs 7,726 bytes +407 Most of what was added about vehicles had nothing to do with targeting and seemed to be about not dealing damage to artifacts even if they have a toughness value. Any implied point about target validity is a) much less common or confused and b) already addressed above with the mention of type-changing making targets invalid. However, this was a perfect reminder of the need to clarify the difference between damage/other actual effects vs targeting... undo Tag: Source edit
  • curprev 03:0403:04, 31 December 2021Jerodast talk contribsm 7,319 bytes +13 minor formatting/wording changes for better clarity, especially avoiding the word "multiple" used in two different ways in the same sentence undo Tag: Source edit
  • curprev 02:5002:50, 31 December 2021Jerodast talk contribs 7,306 bytes +423 Moving spell redirection notes into one place; non-rules notes don't belong under Rules. / Maro defined it as "with a single target" but several spells (Commandeer, Sudden Substitution, Deflecting Swat, Emissary of Grudges, Sideswipe, Wild Ricochet, Spellskite) change multi-target spell targets, without copying, and they're R/U too, so I'm dropping that clause. / Was skeptical of card count since seems hard to source, but I made Scryfall query and it's pretty close - actually a bit higher! undo Tag: Source edit
  • curprev 02:0602:06, 31 December 2021Jerodast talk contribs 6,883 bytes 0 hah, actually has a page just for the ability, good for illusions undo Tag: Source edit
  • curprev 02:0502:05, 31 December 2021Jerodast talk contribs 6,883 bytes +437 Since it seems like everyone wants to lump "illegal targets" interactions together, I'll rewrite into 2 paragraphs. Maybe they should just be their own section? Added examples for triggers since it was a bit vague before (also, Ward example added earlier didn't really make sense in terms of invalid targets, since that's not at all how it works, but it is a great example of targeting-triggered abilities). Not sure why "effects...allow" was thought to be wrong pluralization, changing it back. undo Tag: Source edit
  • curprev 00:1700:17, 31 December 2021Jerodast talk contribs 6,446 bytes +326 Brought up the "countered by game rules" phrase someone added below, which I think is much more relevant here. Added note to avoid the laborious "spells or abilities" phrasing every 10 words. Used more common "response" term instead of "reaction". Cleaned up a few other bits. undo Tag: Source edit

30 December 2021

  • curprev 23:5923:59, 30 December 2021Jerodast talk contribs 6,120 bytes +118 "Up to X targets" is NOT an exception to the "may take action" rules - it doesn't use the word "may" at all, so how could it create an exception to those rules? These are similar but contrasting templates; neither is an exception to the other. Also specifically pointed out "up to one" which is directly related to the old phrasing. (Also, removed excessive plural hedging, which hurts readability for the sake of very technical semantics which are already implied with the singular version.) undo Tag: Source edit

27 December 2021

25 October 2021

24 October 2021

17 September 2021

17 October 2020

17 April 2020

13 November 2019

12 November 2019

  • curprev 11:0611:06, 12 November 2019Jerodasst talk contribs 4,910 bytes +4,270 major expansion. for such a fundamental concept it seemed like there should be a bit more of an explanation instead of just straight into the legalese. will add some refs later too. undo

8 October 2019

4 June 2019

29 May 2019

6 April 2019

13 July 2018

7 July 2018

27 December 2017

14 May 2016

30 December 2015

5 August 2015

28 January 2015

30 December 2014

13 December 2014

28 September 2014

26 September 2014

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)