Welcome to the trial installment of Personal Tutor (AKA, Project Goldilocks). While we spend a lot of time on these forums talking about fixes and infractions and rules, we rarely talk about what we can do as judges to make our answers as instructive as possible to players without crossing the line into coaching or tedious lecturing. Opening up that discussion is the goal of Personal Tutor. So, here's the scenario:

Astonishment and Novelty are playing in a Standard GPT. Astonishment attacks with Boros Reckoner. Novelty blocks it with both Archangel of Thune and Ajani's Sunstriker. Then they realize they have a problem and call you over. “So, do we each get one trigger or two triggers?”

The “Correct” Answer: Astonishment gets 1. Novelty gets 2.

Now the players could continue their match with just that, but they wouldn't really learn anything. The “correct” answer is just too little. How can we improve that answer so that the players learn and remember something about the way the rules of Magic actually work? Be careful not to make the answer too big by coaching or diving into minutiae of the CR or talking so long players zone out.

Make it approachable. Make understandable. Make it just right.

If you are a judge candidate or level 1 judge, feel free to answer right away. If you are an L2, please wait a day. If you are L3 or higher, please wait 2 days. There is no definitive answer, so don't be shy about contributing your opinion.

Next Saturday I'll wrap it up with lessons learned both about the answer and the discussion format. So if you think this sort of discussion is a great idea or a waste of time or could be better if it were slightly different, please send me a private message.

Boros Reckoner (R/W)(R/W)(R/W)
Creature — Minotaur Wizard (3/3)
Whenever Boros Reckoner is dealt damage, it deals that much damage to target creature or player.
(R/W): Boros Reckoner gains first strike until end of turn.

Ajani's Sunstriker (W)(W)
Creature — Cat Cleric (2/2)
Lifelink

Archangel of Thune (3)(W)(W)
Creature — Angel (3/4)
Flying
Lifelink
Whenever you gain life, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

“So, once blocks have been decided and each player is ready to go to damage, each creature will deal damage simultaneously - either to Novelty, or the creatures blocking them. That means that, at the same time, each of Sunstriker and Archangel will deal damage to Boros Reckoner equal to their power. Each of these creatures have lifelink, so the damage that each creature deals causes Novelty to gain life. Two creatures, two sources with lifelink, two Archangel triggers.

However, when we look at Boros Reckoner, combat will cause it to take 5 damage simultaneously. Since combat is a single instance of damage, Boros Reckoner will only trigger once.”

Darcy answered almost exactly as I was thinking at first, but trying to think of it as if I was given that answer, I see some confusion on the horizon:

Thinking as one of the players: Sure, the reckoner takes all its damage at once, so I can buy that one one event, so one trigger. But that also means that the two blocking creatures are dealing damage at the same time. And since all damage happens at once, that is still the same single damage event. You have 5 damage, so you gain 5 life. Right?“ (I know that's now how it works, but if you're asking about this, you don't necessarily know that) The answer looks internally inconsistent unless you get it.

A similar followup question from a slightly different point of view: Looking at it the other way, since you say ”Two creatures, two sources with lifelink, two Archangel triggers“, why couldn't you also also say ”Two creatures, two sources of damage to Reckoner, so two Reckoner triggers“?

The difference (as I understand it) is that the whole damage event is a single thing, but the lifelink replacement effects generate 2 separate events in addition to the damage event, (which also happen at that same time)

My edited version:

“Remember, when damage happens, it all happens as one single event at the same time. That means that, each of Sunstriker and Archangel will deal damage to Boros Reckoner, and Reckoner back to them how you assign.

For this single damage event, the Angel and Sunstriker both do their lifelink thing. Lifelink is a ”Replacement effect“ (not a trigger), so a new ”gain life“ event is generated for each of them, so your Angel gets two triggers. And since this is all still just one damage event, the Reckoner is just taking damage the one time, so it only gets one trigger.” And I'd stick around to make sure the triggers are being resolved correctly, and life totals are doing what they should.

It's slightly more technical, but we're not digging into what math is happening between SBAs, the SBA magic before the triggers get evaluated the other low level housekeeping. All important things, but I don't think the lack of them detracts from the core question.

A mid-level player should be able to pick up on all that I think pretty easily. I wouldn't expect a new player to remember it all later, but they should at least remember there's something different about lifelink, triggers, and that damage happens all at once.

First of all: I'd love to see more of this in the future, because I have a very hard time differentiating between coaching a player and simply explaining interactions. Getting some examples to clarify the difference would be great.

As for this specific prompt:

I agree with Chris that Darcy's explanation seems a bit upsetting, because if you get two lifelink triggers, why you don't get two triggers from being dealt damage is far from clear. On the other hand, diving into the notion of replacement effects seems too technical.

Perhaps something like this:

“Boros Reckoner will trigger once, because all combat damage happens simultaneously in one package. However, Archangel of Thune will trigger twice because the life gain happens separately, unlike the damage. So, short version: One trigger for Reckoner, two for Archangel.”

If either player feels confused about the details after that, I'd probably recommend they come up and ask me after their match is completed, at which point you can explain the details of replacement effects and how damage is applied.

I like your simplification Aric, it gets to the core difference without getting too deep. If they walk away just knowing the lifegain happens separately, that's good enough for mid-match. If they want to know why it happens separately, it seems good for after match.

And thinking about it, most players I've seen ask questions like this would be satisfied with that.

One minor correction, which I think may be relevant to the way you are thinking about your answers: There is no replacement effect involved in Lifelink. Lifelink modifies the results of damage just like Infect or Wither.

I think you guys are making good progress toward a really nice answer. However, I feel there is still an elephant in the room: Why does each lifelink creature get to be a separate event for life gain but not for marking damage on the creature it is blocking - even though both of these are just the result of combat damage?

I can think of at least two ways to answer that question, but there may be better ways I haven't even considered yet.

The way I look at the problem is this;

The creatures (Sunstriker and Angel) work together as a team to deal damage
to the poor Reckoner, and do the damage as a team effort.
When they deal the damage however, they both individually go “Oh by the way
boss (you), here is some life from my lifelink.”
If this example had one creature with lifelink and one without, only one
would go “Oh by the way…”
Likewise, if one of the two original creatures had first-strike, they would
not be working as a team to bring down the Reckoner, and so would deal two
separate instances of damage (first-strike, and normal).

Hopefully the way I view this can help someone understand the situation
better.
- Jonathan Trevarthen.

Ah, I misunderstood the technicalities of Lifelink and effects of damage. After investigating this a bit, the relevant rule (unless I am again mistaken) is this:

118.9. Some triggered abilities are written, “Whenever gains life, . . . .” Such abilities are treated as though they are written, “Whenever a source causes to gain life, . . . .” If a player gains 0 life, no life gain event has occurred, and these abilities won’t trigger.

So, what is really happening here is that the life is all gained at once, but that isn't actually what the Archangel cares about - it cares about each source that has caused that increase of life, which in this case there are two of.

So, here's an update to my previous explanation:

“Boros Reckoner will trigger once, because all combat damage is done simultaneously. Archangel of Thune will trigger twice, because it actually cares about how many sources have caused the life gain, which are two in this case (Archangel and the Sunstriker). So, short version: one for Reckoner, two for Archangel.”

Is it possible that the answer to why lifelink causes two triggers is at odds with your original question of simplicity? It is my understanding that lifelink works the way it does because before it was a keyword in its current iteration, lifelink was a trigger that went on the stack. Each creature would trigger separately. Do we think that Astonishment and Novelty are interested in a history lesson?

History lessons don't have to be long and boring. How might you explain that history to the players in a succinct and understandable way?

“Reckoner triggers once, and the Archangel triggers twice. Why are they different?

”There are two different interactions going on here. First, combat damage happens all at once. The Reckoner cares about damage dealt to it, and since damage is dealt all at once, it only triggers once.

"Second, ‘Whenever you gain life,’ actually means, 'Whenever something causes you to gain life.' Because of this, the Reckoner and the Archangel end up working a little differently from each other. The Archangel cares about the different things that cause life gain–in this case, two creatures–and triggers for each thing.

“You might remember in the past that lifelink used to be a triggered ability? Back then, this was a little more straightforward: since lifelink would trigger twice, the Archangel would trigger twice. Nowadays, it ends up working pretty much exactly the same, just with some different technicalities. Carry on!”


Also, I think this is a great series to start! So much discussion on technicalities is already prevalent, but something that directly aids our roles in customer service will be a great boon for the community.

Well, time to wrap up.

First, on the topic itself:

David hit both the main points I was looking for in this scenario in a really compact form. I like it, but here's the breakdown:

1) As Aric pointed out, 118.9 is the key to understanding this interaction in the context of current rules. I would explain this to a player as “The trick here is that the comprehensive rules put some secret text on ‘Whenever you gain life’ cards. What that actually means is ‘Whenever a source causes you to gain life.’ Dealing damage doesn't have any special secret text. So, it's all one big pile of damage for Reckoner but it's two sources for Archangel. 1 trigger for Astonishment. 2 triggers for Novelty.”

2) As Eric pointed out, you can also understand this from a historical context. “Back in the dark ages of 2009, Lifelink used to be a triggered ability. This mostly meant it was a lot worse, but it also meant each Lifelink dude obviously got his own little bundle of life gain to trigger ‘When you gain life’ events. Well, Lifelink has been fixed so it's part of combat damage, but the rules now look at all the sources separately for life gain events so each lifelink guy still gets to make his own trigger. The damage part doesn't have this Cinderella story behind it though, so it's all just one big pile. 1 Reckoner triggers. 2 Archangel triggers.”

I like to be a bit more conversational, but still to the point. That's just my style, and there's nothing wrong with going a bit shorter or longer just as long as you are sticking your points. When spoken aloud, even a few sentences only takes 30 seconds. (I will also never hesitate to give a 1 or 2 minute extension if the players want a deeper dive. 1 or 2 minute extensions rarely get used or matter, and you are saving time down the road if players know the rules.)


In terms of the concept itself, I've gotten a lot of encouragement both privately and publicly about this sort of idea. I think the format may still need tweaking, but I'm not sure how. I was very pleased with the course of discussion. We started out with a better, but still surface-level explanation. Then we dug a little deeper to find a really nice explanation in current rules terms. Then we even captured historical context. This is exactly what I was looking for, and I hope it illustrates the point I am trying to make.

I would definitely like to keep putting these scenarios out. I'll talk to some forum mods and project leaders to see if we can't find Personal Tutor a good home.

Of course, any feedback or scenario suggestions are still very much welcome. Thanks!