- I do not believe that it does (count as a Wrath effect), as it is contingent on the toughness of the creatures. Wrath effects simply remove creatures in play. --Magic Mage (talk!) 14:43, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind[edit source]
I rewrote the lead section as it contained, while interesting, irrelevant trivia on the reprint history of WoG. Furthermore, the lead failed to impart the fact that Wrath effects are, at their most fundamental, effects of spells, not spells themselves. Per the prior definition, Kederekt Leviathan did not exactly qualify as a Wrath effect, as, technically, the CitP/EtB effect is the doer. This point is made more clear with the enchantments and artifacts that are activated to create the Wrath, or Wrath effect.
I hope that this is understandable, palatable, and even appreciated. If you have objections to this, if you could raise them and explain, that'd be great. Thanks. --Magic Mage (talk!) 14:42, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Is Necroplasm a wrath effect?[edit source]
Do removals who destroy all creature under a determined converted mana cost (e.g. Necroplasm) count as a mass removal? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.127.116.11 (talk • contribs) 2016-08-27T23:06.
- In my opinion yes. A wrath effect has to be two things. I has to destroy creatures and is has to be symmetrical (aka is the same for you and your opponent). - Yandere Sliver 11:32, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- I personally don't think so. It doesn't fall under the definition "most, if not all creatures" mentioned in the article. I also don't agree with most of the examples listed in the article either (like Cyclonic Rift, Powder Keg, etc.), but this is an entirely subjective thing - I wouldn't have called any of these cards "wraths", but I'm not necessarily representative for the entire MTG-playing populace... --Sene (talk) 14:38, 28 August 2016 (UTC)