Can Enchanter's Wardstone safe you from a pit?

[bigfatchef]

Hi there,

more or less every MW game we play, we end up with some small open questions. One we couldn't find any answer is that:

Player 1 has Enchanter's Wardstone in play and his pimped feral bobcat gets forcepushed into a spiked pit by player 2. Spiked pit would kill that creature by melee. After paying 5 mana to reveal spiked pit Player 2 has only 1 mana left, so he could not pay for the destruction of the enchantment of that dying bobcat.

I was player 2 and was like "no bobcat, no enchantment". Player 1 was like "no mana, no destruction of that enchantment. No enchantment without creature. No death possible. Spiked pit prevented"

It would be kind of weird to leave that enchantment there like some lonely shoes in the forest, but that would be a playable compromiss ... but what do you pros say about that?


Thanks a lot for helping answers!

[sdougla2]

You don't have to pay the Enchanter's Wardstone cost if the enchantment is destroyed indirectly (as in the object it was on was destroyed), only if you directly destroy the enchantment, such as with Dispel or Seeking Dispel.

[bigfatchef]

That makes absolutely sense. We just didn't see it written down anywhere.

[Schwenkgott]

A Wardstone owned by Player 1 only protects his enchantments from beeing destroyed by dispel-spells. Enchantments from Player 2 have nothing to do with it.

[Boocheck]

Hi

[mwcard=MWSTX1CKJ01]Enchanter's Wardstone[/mwcard] clearly states, that if YOUR enchantement should be destroyed by a spell or abilityyour opponent controls

[mwcard=MW1I06]Dispel[/mwcard]
[mwcard=MW1I24]Seeking Dispel[/mwcard]
[mwcard=MWSTX1CKQ05]Dispel Wand[/mwcard]
[mwcard=MW1I21]Purge Magic[/mwcard]
[mwcard=FWI01]Destroy Magic[/mwcard]

(did i miss some?)

he has to pay 2 more mana to do so.

[mwcard=MWSTX1CKE05]Spiked Pit[/mwcard] is Yours and it is destroyed because of its own ability, not because your opponent or because it was used on your opponents creature

[bigfatchef]

Hmm. I get the point. But I think you got that situation wrong.

Let's say I control enchanters Wardstone and a feral bobcat with enchantment. The spiked pit is not mine and my enemy forcepushes my bobcat into it.
The connected enchantment would then be destroyed (indirect) by spiked pit (by killing feral bobcat) and (even more indirect) by forcepush (that was causing it all). Both spells are not mine and I am being forced to lose a enchantment. Regarding that the enchantment would be secured by enchanters wardstones cardtext. This would lead to that point that when paying 2 mana to destroy the enchantment is not possible it would very indirect safe bobcat.

But the answer, that only direct spells that destroy enchantment are meant, fully answers my question. As said before this is logical but not written down anywhere I find it

Thanks for all answers!

[Borg]

The connected enchantment would then be destroyed (indirect) by spiked pit

That's where you go wrong.

The enchantment is not destroyed by Spiked Pit, your Creature is destroyed by it ... and since your "creature  enchantment" no longer has a legal target it is attached to it is destroyed as well - I'm sure this is in the rules.

Looked it up for you : p22 under "Enchantments"

"Enchantments are always attached to their target. Place the
attached enchantment beneath the target object, but don’t
cover it completely (so both players can see all attached
spells). An attached enchantment moves with the target. If
the target is destroyed, all attached spells are also destroyed."

[bigfatchef]

Now that answers it completely 

[Sailor Vulcan]

Spiked pit targets the zone, not the creature.