Welcome to Personal Tutor, where we discuss how to maximize our opportunities for player education. Our goal is to transcend the basic answer to create an informative answer that the player will really remember. You may even find this process helps you come to a better understanding of rules and policy yourself.

The Scenario:
You are a judging a Modern format Grand Prix Trial when Nutmeg calls you over to his match. "So, Anise has gone off with Ad Nauseam. Revealed her whole deck, which is now in her hand. It's that face up pile right there. She is casting Slaughter Pact on my Burrenton Forge-Tender. Can I sac it and pick… this?" Nutmeg has pulled the lone copy of Lightning Storm from Anise's hand.

The Basic Answer:
“No.”

This month, we have a very minor adaptation of a real call I received at Grand Prix Richmond. So keep in mind that actual players are your target audience. Remember, the goal of Personal Tutor is not giving the “right answer,” but being concise, comprehensible, and educational. So, what do you say?

L1s and Judge Candidates, feel free to give your answers immediately. L2s, please wait a day to add your input. L3+, please wait two days.

Edited Joshua Feingold (April 11, 2014 02:49:43 AM)

“No. The source of damage is the object that deals it. The card in their hand doesn't do the damage itself. When it's cast it goes on the stack and the spell on the stack is what does the damage, so that's the source.”

I'd expect Comp players to know about the stack and the basics of casting a spell, so hopefully this isn't too technical. I thought about something like “for instants and sorceries, you would play this pretty much like a counterspell”, but I think that's too close to coaching since I'm telling them about timing and how to think about it.

Even though you know everything about what's in Anise's hand and it happens to be face-up on the table right now, it's still a hidden zone, and as far as the game is concerned you can't see it. When you're choosing a source of damage it has to be either some object you can see or something being referenced by an object you can see.

Does it matter that it's a card in a player's hand? And does it matter that the cards “should” be hidden? Would your answer change if Nutmeg controls Telepathy? Why or why not?

If there was a Telepathy, etc., my response would change around to be more specific. The source has to be either a permanent, a spell on the stack, or something being referred to by a spell or ability currently on the stack. My previous response covers the vast majority of situations like this, but the updated response is the most technically correct one.

Here's my stab at an answer:

“Cards that aren't currently interacting with or existing on the stack or the battlefield aren't sources of damage, so you can't choose those.”

If the player questions further, I might add something along the following lines:

“When the ability resolves, you can choose a red permanent, a red object on the stack, or a red object in another zone referred to by an ability on the stack, a replacement effect, or a delayed trigger that's waiting to apply.”

I feel like most players can deduce from the first answer that the Forge-Tender can't save their hide in this case.

I think the important thing to get across is that a “source of damage” is a well defined term in Magic, and a card has to fit a certain criteria in order to be considered as such.

I think it's also important to note that you shouldn't imply that the “source of damage” needs to actually be sending damage somewhere to be considered as such; it's perfectly legal to choose Blood Moon as your source of damage in this case (you never know if it will be animated this turn and attack you!)

I wonder if the player would understand better if we ask them if they think it would still work if Lightning Storm were a creature card such as Ball Lightning instead? A card in the hand does nothing (unless it's Infernal Spawn of Evil) but occupy space.

Thanks to everyone who participated in this month's Personal Tutor discussion.

This month our question dealt with the legality of choosing a card in hand that was about to be cast as a source of damage. Fundamentally, this breaks down into two key issues we need to address. What is a “source?” And when does Anise need to choose that source?

Several participants gravitated immediately to explaining what a source is, which is great. (That's the hard part, after all.) However, there is also an important preamble to that explanation that we want to include to help prime the players for what's coming and really understand what we are telling them.

“'Source' is a word that has a very specific rules meaning in Magic, just like ‘spell’ or ‘permanent.’ A source must be one of three things: a spell on the stack, a permanent on the battlefield, or an object referred to by something on the stack.”

Now that they know what a source is, they must understand when that source has to be chosen. After all, that Lightning Storm absolutely will be a spell on the stack this turn.

"When Forgetender's ability resolves, you must choose something that is a red source at that time. Since Lightning Storm isn't a spell on the stack yet, it isn't a ‘source’ yet either."

By combining these two pieces, you present the players with all the information they need to understand your ruling.

We also had a couple people mention cards in hand not dealing damage. I would advise against this line of explanation. The reason for this is that if you choose a Ball Lightning on the stack with Forgetender's ability, it will still prevent the combat damage that would be dealt by the permanent that Ball Lightning spell becomes. When you tell a player that a card in hand doesn't deal damage, he may incorrectly infer that a creature spell on the stack doesn't deal damage, and thus arrive at the wrong conclusion by extrapolating from your explanation. Since the goal of education is not resolve the ruling we currently face, but to help others correctly resolve similar situations in the future, presenting your explanation in a way that tends to cause faulty inferences is something we should try to avoid.

Thanks again to everyone who participated. Personal Tutor will be back next month with another scenario to turn into an educational opportunity. If you'd like to suggest a discussion topic or become a member of the Personal Tutor team, please send me an email via the forum.