Topic: Rule Clarification: High Priest of Penance vs Trample

So here's the situation. I was trying out my new Orzhov deck. My hubby was trying out his new Gruul deck. Within a few turns, we ran into a situation which we weren't quite sure how to handle. And, surprisingly enough, we weren't able to find a rule clarification online, either. Usually this isn't an issue, because MTGSalvation or the Judge's Blog or some official resource is able to clear things up pretty quickly. Here's how it played out:

My husband had a 10/10 with Trample on the field. It was his only creature. He attacked me. I chose to block with my High Priest of Penance. Upon choosing which permanent to destroy, I chose his creature. Now here is our predicament:

To trigger the high priest's ability, it has to be dealt damage. So the destroy doesn't go off until the combat damage resolves on the priest. However, does the destroy occur between the combat damage and the Trample damage? Or does the Trample damage resolve at the same time as the combat damage? I know that in cases like Double Strike, the creature can be destroyed between the First Strike phase and the regular combat phase -- does Trample work the same way?

I couldn't find any resource that could clarify this for me. My husband feels that the Trample damage is just an extension of the combat damage, so it shouldn't be considered a separate "damage phase".

However, then you take into consideration cards like Executioner's Swing. The creature has to deal damage before you can utilize that card, as well. So once it's dealt damage, what is the point of giving it -5 to its power? The card might as well read "gives target creature -0/-5" or "destroys target creature with toughness 5 or less" (as I've seen similar rules on other cards).

Anyway, if someone could clear this up for us, we'd be very grateful. Thanks!

Re: Rule Clarification: High Priest of Penance vs Trample

Your husband is correct that trample damage is an extension of combat damage. It's all done at the same time unlike first strike/double strike. In this case your priest would die, you would take 9 damage, and then the priests ability would trigger upon death. 

As for executioner's swing, it's just the way the card was designed that you can give -5 after damage has been dealt. It's solid removal in limited whereas you are playing constructed so it seems much worse.

Re: Rule Clarification: High Priest of Penance vs Trample

Amythyst wrote:

... take into consideration cards like Executioner's Swing. The creature has to deal damage before you can utilize that card, as well. So once it's dealt damage, what is the point of giving it -5 to its power? The card might as well read "gives target creature -0/-5" or "destroys target creature with toughness 5 or less" (as I've seen similar rules on other cards).

By dropping the power by five, you also prevent that creature's power from being used in combination with other effects, like Pit Fight, after the end of the combat damage phase.

Profile - Wishlist - Tradelist

Black and Blue--not just for bruises anymore.

Re: Rule Clarification: High Priest of Penance vs Trample

Oh no, I realize it was a solid removal card. I suppose my point with Executioner's Swing was that, despite that it's primary use is going to be removal, there were other ways to word it. Most -X/-X cards don't have the caveat that the target has to have had dealt damage in the turn, making them useful to soften a blow as much as they can also be used for removal.

Thank you guys, though, for the clarification. Especially with the example of the Pit Fight card. It definitely makes sense, now, how aside from removal there could be other uses for Executioner's Swing (giving it a reason to be written the way it is).

We figured we played out the Trample correctly, and I'm glad that we figured it right. I was just over-thinking it.

Ironically the only High Priest of Pennance + Trample examples we could find online dealt with if the high priest was the one with Trample. LoL