Rule 608.2b has been changed, does this effect anything?

[gkraigher]

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/284b&page=3

608.2b

This rule talk about how a resolving spell or ability checks to see if its targets are still legal. If a spell or ability has multiple targets, it can still resolve as long as at least one of its targets is still legal. Here's where it gets fun. The rule specified that the spell or ability couldn't perform any actions on an illegal target, make that target perform any actions, or make another object perform any actions on the illegal target. This was a technical way of saying that illegal targets aren't affected by spells and abilities.

But there was a problem: spells and abilities could affect an illegal target without performing any actions. Consider Frost Breath. If one of its targets was illegal when it resolves, both creatures wouldn't untap during their controller's next untap step. This feels very wrong, so when Sudden Storm appeared in the Born of the Gods set, it seemed like a great time to address it. The change to this rule shuts down this hole. Illegal targets of Sudden Storm (and Frost Breath) won't be affected and will untap as normal.

does this effect anything in vintage? 

[The Atog Lord]

I have been playing since Unlimited, and I've never seen this rule come up before.

[TendrilsFTW]

I may be a little confused on this but is it saying that before this rule change that we could've been about to say...rack and ruin a mox and an inkwell leviathan?  Not that this situation would come up anymore.

[vaughnbros]

I've definitely never heard of this ruling and as such have been playing it how made sense to me, which is apparently now the new rule.

I may be a little confused on this but is it saying that before this rule change that we could've been about to say...rack and ruin a mox and an inkwell leviathan?  Not that this situation would come up anymore.

No.  It wouldn't have affected inkwell.  Inkwell has shroud and could never be targeted in the first place.  I believe this is referring to a scenario where the creature becomes illegal after its already targeted, say morphling's shroud ability.

Also it wouldn't have worked with rack and ruin.  Rack and ruin requires two targets, whereas both frost breath and the new card, sudden storm, can have "up to two targets".

[Smmenen]

Without looking at the new rule wording, it doesn't sound like this will change anything relevant to Vintage.  It simply closes a loophole that allows things like triggers or replacements for things that shouldn't trigger or replace.    It doesn't fundamentally change the rule.  If you play Rack and Ruin and one target becomes illegal, it won't rules counter the spell, I would suppose based upon the text above.

[evouga]

It comes up very, very rarely in practice.

Consider Luminate Primordial. It has the ability

"When Luminate Primordial enters the battlefield, for each opponent, exile up to one target creature that player controls and that player gains life equal to its power."

Suppose you are playing a multiplayer game with two opponents. Primordial enters the battlefield and you pick a creature to exile for each of the two opponents. In response, one of your opponents gives his creature protection from white. When Primordial's ability resolves, it isn't countered (since it still has one legal target), that creature does not get exiled (since it is now an illegal target, and Primodial cannot do anything to it), but its controller still gains life (since reading the creature's power does not count as doing something to the illegal target).

Presumably that interaction is now fixed by the rule change.

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

I may be a little confused on this but is it saying that before this rule change that we could've been about to say...rack and ruin a mox and an inkwell leviathan?  Not that this situation would come up anymore.

when they refer to illigal targets the mean more like rack and ruin and mox and lodestone and watch one getting welded out, or lodestone gets vines of vastwood casted on it.

[gkraigher]

What about Kill Switch?  It is a card that could actually be sideboarded in against Shops.  How does that card interact with this new ruling?  

In a shops mirror match, you could declare attackers, then during that step activate kill switch to tap all artifacts.  Because your creatures would already be tapped, would they get to untap during your next turn?

Before this rules change, Kill Switch was the only artifact that got to untap during your turn.  Are all previously tapped artifacts no longer effected?

Or does this not effect Kill Switch because the card does not specify targets, using the word all.   You have always been able to tap a tapped permanent unless the card specifically said it needed an untapped one.