Multiple instances of Regeneration accumulated and used at different moments

[andrebonotto]

First of all, sorry for the long post, but I will write this long in order to try me best to explain the exact doubt and the circunstances of its appearance.


So, let's see item 701.12 on the Comprehensive Rules, that explains this ability:


701.12. Regenerate

701.12a If the effect of a resolving spell or ability regenerates a permanent, it creates a replacement effect that protects the permanent the next time it would be destroyed this turn. In this case, “Regenerate [permanent]” means “The next time [permanent] would be destroyed this turn, instead remove all damage marked on it and tap it. If it’s an attacking or blocking creature, remove it from combat.”

701.12b If the effect of a static ability regenerates a permanent, it replaces destruction with an alternate effect each time that permanent would be destroyed. In this case, “Regenerate [permanent]” means “Instead remove all damage marked on [permanent] and tap it. If it’s an attacking or blocking creature, remove it from combat.”

701.12c Neither activating an ability that creates a regeneration shield nor casting a spell that creates a regeneration shield is the same as regenerating a permanent. Effects that say that a permanent can’t be regenerated don’t prevent such abilities from being activated or such spells from being cast; rather, they prevent regeneration shields from having any effect."


But after reading it, I still do not think that I have the information I needed regarding how to deal with multiples instances of the Regeneration ability that were all set at the same time, but that are intended to be used at different moments.

The in-game situation where my doubt aroused was as follows:

Player (A) had on the battlefield three untapped creatures: Llanowar Elves, Quirion Ranger and Ezuri, Renegade Leader. Neither of them had "summoning sickness".

Player (B) was the active player, and had on the battlefield a Goblin Lackey, without "summoning sickness" as well.

Player (B) moved to the Combat Phase, declared Goblin Lackey as an attacker, and still during the Declare Attackers Step played Pyrokinesis, exiling a red card from his hand to deal damage to Ezuri, Renegade Leader (2 damage), Llanowar Elves (1 damage) and Quirion Ranger (1 damage). He them passed priority.

Player (A), in response, tapped Llanowar Elves to add :g: and used it to cast Crop Rotation, sacrificing one of his tapped lands to fetch for Gaea's Cradle and put it into play. Player (A) them tapped his new acquired Cradle to add :g::g::g: (as he controlled 3 creatures at the moment).

***That is the point in which the doubt regarding multiple instances of Regenaration aroused.

What Player (A) wanted to do was to use all his 3 mana on Ezuri, Renegade Leader's first activated ability to:
1) Place a first Regeneration Shield on Llanowar Elves, to prevent him from being killed by Pyrokinesis;
2) Place a first Regeneration Shield on Quirion Ranger, to prevent him from being killed by Pyrokinesis;
3) Use the remaining :g: to place a second Regeneration Shield on Quirion Ranger.
4) Let Pyrokinesis resolve, killing just Ezuri, and tapping the two other elves as an effect of the Renegeration process.
5) Still during the Declare Attackers Step, use Quirion Ranger's activated ability to untap itself, returning a Forest Player (A) controled to his hand;
6) Move to the Declare Blockers Step, with Player (A) declaring Quirion Ranger as a blocker to Goblin Lackey.
7) As a result of combat, Player (A) intended that his Quirion Ranger sucessfully blocked Player (B)'s Goblin Lackey, with Lackey being dead but Quirion Ranger remaining alive as a result of the second Regeneration Shield that was set on Quirion Ranger at "3)".


Is this analysis of the interaction correct, regarding the "accumulation" of multiples instances of Regeneration, that were intended to be used at different times?

[Nihil Credo]

Yes, it works. When the first destruction (from Pyrokinesis) would happen, both shields try to replace it with "tap + remove from combat". You choose one replacement effect to apply, the other will not see any destruction happening so it will ignore it, and stick around to see the next destruction (from combat) and replace that.

[cdr]

616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object's controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply ... once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.

There's more to 616, but that's the important part. When more than one replacement effect would apply to an event, the appropriate player chooses one. If the other effect(s) no longer apply to the modified event, those effects will be around until the appropriate event occurs or they expire.

[andrebonotto]

Thank you both, Nihil Credo and cdr. :smile:

So, to confirm I got this right...

The "redundant" replacement effect that was "floating around" just doesn't cease to exist in consequence of not being the "chosen one" to apply. It will be waiting for the next opportunity to be applied, until it expires (in this case, at the end of current turn).
And as a consequence of this rule, in the situation I presented, Quirion Ranger could indeed have an extra Regeneration shield formerly placed upon him, so that he could later succeed in blocking and killing Goblin Lackey, and surviving the process.

Is that it?

...

Also, in this case we talked about two replacement effects of the same kind that were "competing" to apply to an event.
But if the case to be taken involved two replacement effects of different kinds, would the situation still be ruled by this same item 616's instruction (that says that it will "be around")?
I think I might have heard of some situations in which, if there are various replacement effects trying to apply to an event, once one of them is chosen, the others cease to exist.

[cdr]

Thank you both, Nihil Credo and cdr. :smile:

So, to confirm I got this right...

The "redundant" replacement effect that was "floating around" just doesn't cease to exist in consequence of not being the "chosen one" to apply. It will be waiting for the next opportunity to be applied, until it expires (in this case, at the end of current turn).
And as a consequence of this rule, in the situation I presented, Quirion Ranger could indeed have an extra Regeneration shield formerly placed upon him, so that he could later succeed in blocking and killing Goblin Lackey, and surviving the process.

Is that it?

Yes, that's right.


Also, in this case we talked about two replacement effects of the same kind that were "competing" to apply to an event.
But if the case to be taken involved two replacement effects of different kinds, would the situation still be ruled by this same item 616's instruction (that says that it will "be around")?
I thought I might heard of some situations in which, if there are various replacement effects trying to apply to an event, once one of them is chosen, the others cease to exist.

No, one-use replacement effects ("the next time...") will not cease to exist if not chosen - they'll exist either until applied to an appropriate event or they expire (most state that they expire at the end of the turn, like regeneration). Multiple replacement effects can apply to a single event if the application of previous replacements doesn't make the other replacements no longer applicable.

[andrebonotto]

Okay, understood. Thank you again.