So my indestructible permanent just died to last grasp...

[CalmStorm]

"if an indestructible permanent has been dealt enough damage to destroy it it is not destroyed" can the definition be changed because it is confusing...

[LucasBerse]

yeah its confusing, basically last grasp its not a destruction effect -x/-x its more like a dicease thing when the HP of the creature becomes less than 0 so it dies.

[Puzzlemint]

Last Gasp doesn't deal damage. You can tell because it doesn't say it deals damage.

[Maur]

Magic is very specific with its wording. Indestructible protects from spells or effects that say things like "destroy target creature" or like mentioned above, enough damage will destroy a creature. Indestructible are protected from this damage but not from spells or effects that change their toughness to 0, so because this doesn't "destroy" them they still go to the graveyard.

[Barser]

A creature can't exist on the battlefield if its thoughness is 0. No regenerate or anything as far as I know.

[LucasBerse]

Originally posted by Barser:

A creature can't exist on the battlefield if its thoughness is 0. No regenerate or anything as far as I know.

thats not true, indestructible creatures can be at 0 thoughness if they recieve damage from creatures and still survive

[Puzzlemint]

Damage doesn't reduce toughness, despite how Duels of the Planeswalkers displays it.

[Shadowcran]

The thing about indestructible and Last Gasp:
Last Gasp lasts until end of turn. The indestructible creature loses it's toughness, but cannot get it back to keep it's indestructible status as it's Til the end of turn.

That's why spells like Last Gasp exist. If it said " does 3 damage to strength and toughness" it would do nothing to indestructible. It would be a waste of a spell to even try.

Other spells like Gasp exist: Disfigure and grasp of Darkness to name two.

The alternative is to not put any creatures that say indestructible into the game at all. Magic puts counters to such cards to maintain the game stability. That's a good rule of thumb. If one card becomes overpowered, make counters for it or simply just rename it to "(insert name of card): The Gathering and retire all others.

You may say it's unfair to have cards to counter indestructible, but it's also unfair to have a creature as indestructible. Having both means we have options.

[CalmStorm]

Originally posted by shadowcran:

You may say it's unfair to have cards to counter indestructible, but it's also unfair to have a creature as indestructible. Having both means we have options.

I just don't find it very clearly explained in the game what indestructible means - thanks to the people here who cleared that up for me.

I don't find indestructible or its counters unfair - there are plenty of counters to indestructible already such as cards like pacifism, permatap cards, sacrifice a creature cards and so on and there are far more unfair cards than indestructible in DOTP imo. Just the thing that ticked me off is the description made it seem reducing an indestructible card to 0 toughness would not be one of the counters to it.

[Barser]

Originally posted by Berse:

Originally posted by Barser:

A creature can't exist on the battlefield if its thoughness is 0. No regenerate or anything as far as I know.

thats not true, indestructible creatures can be at 0 thoughness if they recieve damage from creatures and still survive

Well yes thats true in a way. But the rules actually say a creature cannot exist if it got 0 thoughness. Damage effect that reduces a creatures toughness to 0 just works in a different way.

[KookiePoo]

Dude i know how you feel the trippon wizards that created this topsy turvy contracdictoru game is amusingly sadistic to the senses, unqiuely unpredictable the rules there are no rules but as i have discovered thats what makes it so fun.