Does reverberate copy damage of fireball?
Asked by zerotimestatechamp 14 years ago
Say I Reverberate a fireball. If I spent 4 or the x then does the copy also deal 4 damage?
Reverberate makes a copy of the spell. So the x part is copied as well. It also covers additional costs. So you could fling emerkul and copy it with out needing to worry about the second one as the condition was already met.
August 12, 2010 6:46 p.m.
zerotimestatechamp says... #4
If Martial Coup is Reverberate d then do the two spells kill the creatures the other makes? Do all the creatures survive? Do only one copy's creatures survive?
August 12, 2010 6:57 p.m.
KrazyCaley says... #5
If you Reverberate Martial Coup, then first, a copy is put on the stack of the original Martial Coup. The copy resolves and the person who cast Reverberate gets howevermany tokens, and if it was 5 tokens, all other creatures are destroyed. Then the original Martial Coup resolves and its controller gets tokens, and if it was 5, all other creatures are destroyed, including the tokens from the copied MC.
-C
August 12, 2010 7:53 p.m.
zerotimestatechamp says... #6
Thanks. Although I can't use this, I'm curious. You made it sound like two different players are casting these spells which would most likely be the case. However, what if only one person was casting them both? Same outcome?
August 13, 2010 3:06 a.m.
nammertime says... #7
The outcome is the same with a Reverberate d Martial Coup , regardless of who cast the spells.
August 13, 2010 3:22 a.m.
KrazyCaley says... #8
Yep, if you Reverberate your own X = 5 Martial Coup, at the end of the day, you're going to have five tokens and everything else will get destroyed, including another 5 tokens from the copied Martial Coup.
August 13, 2010 5:06 p.m.
Maybe the rules have changed, but last time I checked using Reverberate on X cost spells sets X to 0 for the cost. This is for the same reason why copying Harrow doesn't force you to sac an additional land- all costs are "paid" by Reverberate at 0.
August 13, 2010 11:23 p.m.
Think of it this way.
Fireball , you pay 5 mana additional for it.
It's on the stack. As is.
You cast Reverberate copying the Fireball . It makes an exact copy of the Fireball . Difference is that you may choose new targets for the spell.
So you'd be dealing 5 damage from the Reverberate d Fireball, then 5 damage from the original fireball.
The thing about copying a spell is that it's cost is already paid for, and therefore X is whatever the copy of the spell is as your making a copy of it. NOT modifying it :)
As I stated before. Harrow like Fling is an addiditional COST. hence why creating a copy is dirty yet so good :) .
Oh, and to back up my arguement from Gatherer.wizards.com...
15/08/2010 Reverberate can target (and copy) any instant or sorcery spell, not just one with targets. It doesn't matter who controls it.
15/08/2010 When Reverberate resolves, it creates a copy of a spell. You control the copy. That copy is created on the stack, so it's not "cast." Abilities that trigger when a player casts a spell won't trigger. The copy will then resolve like a normal spell, after players get a chance to cast spells and activate abilities.
15/08/2010 The copy will have the same targets as the spell it's copying unless you choose new ones. You may change any number of the targets, including all of them or none of them. If, for one of the targets, you can't choose a new legal target, then it remains unchanged (even if the current target is illegal).
15/08/2010 If the spell Reverberate copies is modal (that is, it says "Choose one --" or the like), the copy will have the same mode. You can't choose a different one.
15/08/2010 If the spell Reverberate copies has an X whose value was determined as it was cast (like Earthquake does), the copy has the same value of X.
15/08/2010 You can't choose to pay any additional costs for the copy. However, effects based on any additional costs that were paid for the original spell are copied as though those same costs were paid for the copy too. For example, if a player sacrifices a 3/3 creature to cast Fling, and you copy it with Reverberate, the copy of Fling will also deal 3 damage to its target.
15/08/2010 If the copy says that it affects "you," it affects the controller of the copy, not the controller of the original spell. Similarly, if the copy says that it affects an "opponent," it affects an opponent of the copy's controller, not an opponent of the original spell's controller.
I hope this helps once and for all to clarify this rather tricky stumbling block :)
August 14, 2010 8:13 a.m.
The only cost you pay for Reverberate is it's mana cost. (R)(R)
The X part in the spell is actually now treated as a copy of the original spell... Once Reverberate Resolves.
So modifications can't be made to the copy (with the exception of Stifle for Martial Coup maybe? lol).
But Harrow, and Fling, and any other card that treats part of the casting of the card is (for ease) ignored because the copy was not "cast".
August 14, 2010 8:23 a.m.
nammertime says... #12
I think Dr. McMeen confused the X rule with playing an X spell without paying its mana cost.
August 14, 2010 12:49 p.m.
I'm wondering if its possible to ask questions instead of making a random post in the forum. Well, is it?
zerotimestatechamp says... #1
If there is an additional cost of a spell that is met the first time, does it have to be met again for a Reverberate d spell?
August 12, 2010 6:18 p.m.