Very good and helpful video. But could you also do a video about the small backing ups, players (especially at regular) do. "Ups, I played the wrong land just now, can I take that back" "Hey, I tapped my mana wrong, may I change that". I know, that this is supported when no extra information was gained. But I would be interested in your thoughts how to handle that best. Maybe also give an unexpected example at competitive REL. Also what to do when Nick says "No". I struggle a bit with the best communication as a TO. On the hand I want my players to play concentrated and precise but on the other hand I want to be inviting to a casual audience and don't encourage rules lawyering. Thanks in advance
A lot of players get missed triggers wrong. I have lost count of how many times I've heard "it's not a 'may' ability" even though the optionalness of the trigger is completely irrelevant.
@@cool_scatter No, that's just where I hear people say "it's not a 'may' ability." They're excusing why we need to go back and do it, even though I'm fine with allowing it regardless of why.
I have no idea why "it's not a may ability" is such a persistent myth. Magic indeed used to have this, but it was changed probably 10-15 years ago. I assume that some other card game must work like this and that's why this is such a common point of confusion.
@@JudgingFtW That's correct, Yugioh does it this way. They say maintaining the game state is both player's responsibility, so if a mandatory trigger is missed, the game state needs to be repaired if possible. Intentionally not telling an opponent he missed his beneficial mandatory trigger would be seen as cheating in Yugioh, as you're violating your duty to maintain the game state and try to get an unjustified advantage. Mind though that Yugioh has less triggers and only few of them are mandatory.
Did you see the semifinals of PT Outlaws of Thunder Junction with Yuta Takahashi? In game 3 (I think) the judge actually got the call wrong on an interaction between tidebinder countering the ability of a battle when it is defeated. Curious if you had thoughts or could extrapolate any potential issues that would arise
th-cam.com/video/m-PFJ6ECslc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=g2i_d9og_YDfpbUt He calls the judge for a rule clarification at 18:53, if Tidebinder can counter the ability of a battle that loses its last counter. He does, and judge says it stays on field but can't flip again. At 27:35 the judge clarifies that the ruling was incorrect and that the battle should've left the field. He asks if it affected the game, and players said no - but commentary pointed out that "Temporary Lockdown" could've been played and exiled the battle. Then if Lockdown were removed, the battle would come back and that has nasty implications. Curious if you have thoughts on this scenario that happened so late in an important tournament.
@@ghostaccountlmaoseems pretty cut and dry no? Judge made a mistake and luckily caught it before it affected gameplay, so they rectified it and moved on.
I the scrubland/brainstorm example, I think were I Amy's opponent, a solution I might find acceptable (assuming i know nothing of her hand/cards drawn) would be to take the top two cards of her library, put them into her hand, then choose three random cards and put them back on top of the library, then put Brainstorm back in her hand. This is equally as likely to hurt Amy, as it is to help me.
in the lightning bolt instance where Amy gets to see the top of her library before deciding to crack the fetchland, you back up the game to the point where Amy has no mana to cast the lightning bolt and the lightning bolt stays in her hand, then have Amy draw the card without cracking the fetchland, then proceed with gameplay.
For the braindstorm example at the end, and I assume this is not a valid resolution in the rules, but I think the "most accurate" way to fix it would be to put those two cards back into hand, then use the fetchland to find a blue source, then she returns two cards to the top of her deck.
Great video and very useful information. Would love more videos on judging like this. I do also like the game rules ones, but infraction procedures and the like are also useful videos
I had a case where I played EDH with people and I just made a mistake (I was new-ish to the game). So, it was just about drawing a card and I drew a card as I was not supposed to. Okay? I put it back and shuffled my library and said sorry and everyone went total hostile, why I would shuffle my library. Since there was no information available about the positions of my card in my library at that moment, I figured it would be just fine to randomize the deck that I still don't know what is on top of it. Tho, I still think that might had been the best fix for the situation that wouldn't hurt anyone, but they got so upset about that I shuffled my deck, even if there was no information about it at all where which card was. I tried arguing it's not a big deal since no information was available and at this point my deck is randomized, no matter how many times I would shuffle it, but they simply didn't liked the fact that I shuffled the card back. The worst part was as I said ok... then I put the card back on top again? Looked for it and they went nuts again. Welp, screw that. Never played MTG afterwards with people again. Only online on MTGA for one or two games a year.
in my casual games in the case of the resolved brainstorm i would normally suggest something like taking the top two cards that were put back with brainstorm off of the library, performing the fetch with the remaining library, shuffling, and then replacing the two cards back to the top whilst swapping which lands were tapped. is there anything in policy that could allow for this sort of fix or is that thing just not really done?
Question: how does Return the Favor, copying a triggered ability, interact with Animate Dead. This is an interaction that is not unlikely to come up in Legacy, as some Red Prison decks play Return the Favor. Our local Judge community was unsure how to rule this. Thanks in advance.
Interesting. My guess is: since copied trigger is controlled by caster of Return the Favor, the creature EtB by his side, and original trigger fails to return the card to BF, doing nothing.
After really thinking about this, I agree. The black player chose a creature card while casting the spell. The red player returns the creature to the battlefield under their control. And the black player retains control of the aura.
You should do the interaction between return the favors copy ability and leyline binding. I just took a chance on mtga with copying the leylines trigger and targeting the copy into leyline itself and it exiled the leyline completely. Why does this exactly happen?
Do the rules cover interruptions from outside the game? Two examples: Players have created a complicated stack situation with multiple counter effects and damage effects waiting to resolve, then someone drops something near the game, makes a loud noise, and both players forget exactly what was targeted with what. Or, mid-to-late game, with a complicated board state, a fist fight breaks out between two other people and one of them gets pushed onto the table knocking cards off and mixing up libraries, graveyards, and battlefields.
If targets were given but forgotten, I think the best course of action would simply be to reestablish the targets. In the latter case, not really. The Infraction Procedure Guide (IPG) handles unsportsmanlike conduct between players (and outsiders too), but nothing about recovering the game state when neither play is at fault. I think the general principle is to recover as much of the game state as both players can recollect and agree upon. It is a messy situation when dealing with hidden zones. The head judge, if one is present, would decide how it is handled. I imagine it is a situationally-dependent in any case.
Can you do Mondrak The Glory Dominus + Ojer taq, Deepest foundation, + Anointed Procession, + Divine Visitation, + Elspeth, Sun's Champion +1 ? This is a common combo I constantly get, and people like to argue over the ruling.
Yep. Those first four cards have replacement effects that apply to Elspeth's +1 ability (CR 614.1a, 614.16). You get to decide the order that they apply, but each applies only once (CR 614.5). In any case (associative property), the result is 36 4/4 white Angel creature tokens with flying and vigilance.
@judging ftw: Why do you think there is no partial fix? I feel like a lot of situations could be fixed by the judge if they were allowed to retroactively fix only the part of the game, which is affected by the mistake without backing up, e.g. a wrong life total, where booth players agree that it should be different several turns later. Why do you think such an option doesn't exist within the rules?
The official explanation for this is that as appealing as this might sound, it's very inconsistent. Sometimes it's very straightforward to determine what would need to be done to retroactively correct the board state, but other times it isn't. For example, let's say Amy plays a Silence with illegal mana. Then, her creature doesn't die in combat because Nick didn't play a combat trick that would have killed it. There isn't a clear way to retroactively fix just the part of the game that was affected by that mistake. Judges already display a rather high degree of variance in our opinions on whether a backup is appropriate or not in a number of real-world situations. This problem of inconsistency would be greatly magnified if judges were also responsible for determining what partial fix might be appropriate in a world where this was part of the official fix for these infractions.
If a player is trying to cast a spell with mana from Selvala, Explorer Returned and doesn't generate enough mana, the spell is also backed up, right? Does that fall into a different category?
It is technically a different category. Illegal actions such as the one you described are defined under CR 730.1. The back ups Dave explains here are more so a judge's tool for resolving infractions, and so those are describe in the IPG. The main difference is that if you start to cast a spell with Selvala and it becomes illegal, you have not committed an infraction, and the game state returns to before the casting except with Selvala's mana ability still used (not directly called a back up, but it resembles one). You would not get a warning or penalty from a judge for this unless that illegal action might gain you an advantage (enter: Panglacial Wurm).
Hello! I have a very burning (pun intended) question for you. In a commander (or brawl) game, if I exile kroxa, titan of death's hunger (who's my commander) from my graveyard to pay the addicional cost for the card Corpse Explosion and move kroxa from exile to the command zone, does Corpse Explosion deals the 6 damage to each creature and planeswalker? I have seen this interaction a lot in deck discussions online but when I do this on Arena the Corpse Explosion deals 0 damage ... In my head I think that it should deal the damage. Is it a bug on MTG Arena?
It should deal 6 damage as far as I know. Last known information is used when determining a referenced object's characteristics after it has left the zone it was expected to be in (CR 608.2h). Kroxa was in the graveyard when the effect was applied, the game will remember the last know power of Kroxa in that zone. I am a little shaky on the CR, but at least this Oracle ruling for Corpse Explosion declares it so: "Use the card's power as it last existed in the graveyard to determine how much damage is dealt."
@@vitorroberto8694 I have to imagine it is, given that Oracle and the CR rule for the 6 damage. I see no reason why it should be 0 damage, unless Arena handles their command zone return rule as a replacement effect.
According to the rules, it’s simply a Warning for the first offense Game Play Errors only upgrade to a Game Loss after the 3rd Warning in the same category. (In this case, the category is “Game Rule Violation”, which is simply a catch-all category for Game Play Errors that don’t have a more specific definition under a different category)
Also, you can’t get DQ-ed for anything other than violations under certain “Unsporting Conduct” categories Yes, this includes intentional Cheating. So on some level, it simply depends on the investigation performed by the judge (if any) But the main point in my previous comment was that improperly tapping your mana is no different than any other Game Play Error from a policy perspective, so I simply explained the far more common case of an honest mistake Anyway, as with any violation, technically you could always get Disqualified if there are additional factors that lead the judge to believe you did in on purpose to gain an advantage (which would typically fall under Cheating or Stalling… with the latter essentially being a special form of cheating that involves deliberate “Slow Play” designed to run out the clock before the opponent can win the current game)
7:43 - Wake up hun, a new corner shoot has dropped. OR Woah, woah, woah, you didn't explain how this would be backed up, but either way it's a doozy. Either the resolution lets Nick (favorably) replace the card he just drew (only speaking up on a bad draw) OR he can search for a land that matches it. It seems like not saying a word when your opponent paths, and either giving some vague gesture to continue (which could be back explained as passing priority back) and / or just hoping your opponent thinks it's on you to know to do it, then calling a judge after you see your draw, is the correct play every time.
Bear in mind that if the judge thinks you're intentionally and knowingly breaking the rules to try and garner an advantage, you will not get the chance to search for your land, but will instead get run out of the tournament with a DQ.
@@JaborWithaY I am not in favour of any rules implementation that let's the least moral and best at lying be at an advantage, though. And seems like that's how this is structured.
I'm not sure what the alternative would be? Until someone invents an infallible truth serum, any system will be vulnerable to malicious actors lying to get out of a penalty.
Dark Confidant is not a "may" ability. Let's say Amy is at 1 life in your example. She "accidentally" misses the Dark Confidant trigger. Does the game back up to force her to reveal the card she drew? Does she lose the game if that card has a mana cost greater than zero? Does she lose the game even if it's a land card? As a judge, I would issue at least a match loss for cheating in this case, and possibly a ban.
That would be a missed trigger scenario. There isn't a penalty for missing one of your own beneficial triggers, but the penalty for a detrimental one is updated to a warning. Intentionally ignoring one is cheating. When it's realized that they forgot it, if it's been less than a full turn, the opponent can choose to have it be forgotten or to put it onto the stack then. Otherwise it's just forgotten. "Upgrade: If the triggered ability is usually considered detrimental for the controlling player and they own the card responsible for the existence of the trigger, the penalty is a Warning. The current game state is not a factor in determining this, though symmetrical abilities (such as Howling Mine) may be considered usually detrimental or not depending on who is being affected" "Players are expected to remember their own triggered abilities; intentionally ignoring one may be Unsporting Conduct - Cheating (unless the ability wouldhave no impact on the game as described above)" "For all other triggered abilities, if the ability was missed prior to the current phase in the previousturn, instruct the players to continue playing. If the triggered ability created an effect whoseduration has already expired, instruct the players to continue playing." "If the triggered ability isn’t covered by the previous paragraphs, the opponent chooses whether the triggered ability is added to the stack. If it is, it’s inserted at the appropriate place on the stack if possible or on the bottom of the stack. No player may make choices for the triggered ability involving objects that would not have been legal choices when the ability should have triggered. For example, if the ability instructs a player to sacrifice a creature, that player can't sacrifice a creature that wasn't on the battlefield when the ability should have triggered." The interesting part is that deciding if a trigger is detrimental or not doesn't take into account the game state, which probably means that Dark Confidant would probably be considered beneficial since it normally is. I would still call a judge just to establish a record; missing one DC trigger during a long stressful tournament is understandable but if it happens a lot then that's a reason to suspect cheating. Rules taken from section 2.1 of the IPG.
I thought this was about the back-up mechanic in game, [[Guardian Scalelord]] is one of my favorite cards of all time. Maybe another episode
You're in luck. Check out DDR#593 th-cam.com/video/DQrC49HMhEc/w-d-xo.html
Differently than it does in the club, I assure you
Depending on who you're playing with
Okay, I thought this was going to be about the March of the Machine mechanic.
Same
same
Same
Same
Backup Valkyrie is nice, pretty much a Baneslayer but can make someone else into a Baneslayer.
Very good and helpful video.
But could you also do a video about the small backing ups, players (especially at regular) do.
"Ups, I played the wrong land just now, can I take that back"
"Hey, I tapped my mana wrong, may I change that".
I know, that this is supported when no extra information was gained. But I would be interested in your thoughts how to handle that best.
Maybe also give an unexpected example at competitive REL.
Also what to do when Nick says "No".
I struggle a bit with the best communication as a TO. On the hand I want my players to play concentrated and precise but on the other hand I want to be inviting to a casual audience and don't encourage rules lawyering.
Thanks in advance
A lot of players get missed triggers wrong. I have lost count of how many times I've heard "it's not a 'may' ability" even though the optionalness of the trigger is completely irrelevant.
The method of allowing triggers to just be missed is relatively new. It hasn't trickled down to casual players yet.
You’re rules lawyering missed triggers in casual play?
@@cool_scatter No, that's just where I hear people say "it's not a 'may' ability." They're excusing why we need to go back and do it, even though I'm fine with allowing it regardless of why.
I have no idea why "it's not a may ability" is such a persistent myth. Magic indeed used to have this, but it was changed probably 10-15 years ago. I assume that some other card game must work like this and that's why this is such a common point of confusion.
@@JudgingFtW That's correct, Yugioh does it this way. They say maintaining the game state is both player's responsibility, so if a mandatory trigger is missed, the game state needs to be repaired if possible.
Intentionally not telling an opponent he missed his beneficial mandatory trigger would be seen as cheating in Yugioh, as you're violating your duty to maintain the game state and try to get an unjustified advantage. Mind though that Yugioh has less triggers and only few of them are mandatory.
Did you see the semifinals of PT Outlaws of Thunder Junction with Yuta Takahashi? In game 3 (I think) the judge actually got the call wrong on an interaction between tidebinder countering the ability of a battle when it is defeated. Curious if you had thoughts or could extrapolate any potential issues that would arise
I did not. If anyone has a link to the appropriate clip, I would be able to offer a more informed opinion.
th-cam.com/video/m-PFJ6ECslc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=g2i_d9og_YDfpbUt
He calls the judge for a rule clarification at 18:53, if Tidebinder can counter the ability of a battle that loses its last counter. He does, and judge says it stays on field but can't flip again.
At 27:35 the judge clarifies that the ruling was incorrect and that the battle should've left the field. He asks if it affected the game, and players said no - but commentary pointed out that "Temporary Lockdown" could've been played and exiled the battle. Then if Lockdown were removed, the battle would come back and that has nasty implications.
Curious if you have thoughts on this scenario that happened so late in an important tournament.
@@ghostaccountlmaoseems pretty cut and dry no? Judge made a mistake and luckily caught it before it affected gameplay, so they rectified it and moved on.
I the scrubland/brainstorm example, I think were I Amy's opponent, a solution I might find acceptable (assuming i know nothing of her hand/cards drawn) would be to take the top two cards of her library, put them into her hand, then choose three random cards and put them back on top of the library, then put Brainstorm back in her hand. This is equally as likely to hurt Amy, as it is to help me.
Great content. Just discovered your channel from your show and tell video.
Always enjoy the patron picks. Interesting episode
Thank you for the video. I enjoyed learning from it.
6:09 Brilliant! today I learned the "normal hidden card error fix"
For more details, DDR#556 is fully devoted to this topic: th-cam.com/video/cKB56-c6tkg/w-d-xo.html
in the lightning bolt instance where Amy gets to see the top of her library before deciding to crack the fetchland, you back up the game to the point where Amy has no mana to cast the lightning bolt and the lightning bolt stays in her hand, then have Amy draw the card without cracking the fetchland, then proceed with gameplay.
For the braindstorm example at the end, and I assume this is not a valid resolution in the rules, but I think the "most accurate" way to fix it would be to put those two cards back into hand, then use the fetchland to find a blue source, then she returns two cards to the top of her deck.
Great video and very useful information. Would love more videos on judging like this. I do also like the game rules ones, but infraction procedures and the like are also useful videos
I thought this would be about the Backup ability. Can you backup a Backup?
I had a case where I played EDH with people and I just made a mistake (I was new-ish to the game). So, it was just about drawing a card and I drew a card as I was not supposed to. Okay? I put it back and shuffled my library and said sorry and everyone went total hostile, why I would shuffle my library. Since there was no information available about the positions of my card in my library at that moment, I figured it would be just fine to randomize the deck that I still don't know what is on top of it. Tho, I still think that might had been the best fix for the situation that wouldn't hurt anyone, but they got so upset about that I shuffled my deck, even if there was no information about it at all where which card was. I tried arguing it's not a big deal since no information was available and at this point my deck is randomized, no matter how many times I would shuffle it, but they simply didn't liked the fact that I shuffled the card back. The worst part was as I said ok... then I put the card back on top again? Looked for it and they went nuts again.
Welp, screw that. Never played MTG afterwards with people again. Only online on MTGA for one or two games a year.
in my casual games in the case of the resolved brainstorm i would normally suggest something like taking the top two cards that were put back with brainstorm off of the library, performing the fetch with the remaining library, shuffling, and then replacing the two cards back to the top whilst swapping which lands were tapped.
is there anything in policy that could allow for this sort of fix or is that thing just not really done?
Bites Za Dusto!
Dang and i thought i understood march of the machines "backup N" keyword, i guess i was wrong
:P
If my opponent got that brainstorm line i would flip the table
Question: how does Return the Favor, copying a triggered ability, interact with Animate Dead. This is an interaction that is not unlikely to come up in Legacy, as some Red Prison decks play Return the Favor. Our local Judge community was unsure how to rule this. Thanks in advance.
Interesting. My guess is: since copied trigger is controlled by caster of Return the Favor, the creature EtB by his side, and original trigger fails to return the card to BF, doing nothing.
After really thinking about this, I agree. The black player chose a creature card while casting the spell. The red player returns the creature to the battlefield under their control. And the black player retains control of the aura.
You should do the interaction between return the favors copy ability and leyline binding. I just took a chance on mtga with copying the leylines trigger and targeting the copy into leyline itself and it exiled the leyline completely. Why does this exactly happen?
Do the rules cover interruptions from outside the game? Two examples: Players have created a complicated stack situation with multiple counter effects and damage effects waiting to resolve, then someone drops something near the game, makes a loud noise, and both players forget exactly what was targeted with what. Or, mid-to-late game, with a complicated board state, a fist fight breaks out between two other people and one of them gets pushed onto the table knocking cards off and mixing up libraries, graveyards, and battlefields.
If targets were given but forgotten, I think the best course of action would simply be to reestablish the targets. In the latter case, not really. The Infraction Procedure Guide (IPG) handles unsportsmanlike conduct between players (and outsiders too), but nothing about recovering the game state when neither play is at fault. I think the general principle is to recover as much of the game state as both players can recollect and agree upon.
It is a messy situation when dealing with hidden zones. The head judge, if one is present, would decide how it is handled. I imagine it is a situationally-dependent in any case.
Can you do Mondrak The Glory Dominus + Ojer taq, Deepest foundation, + Anointed Procession, + Divine Visitation, + Elspeth, Sun's Champion +1 ?
This is a common combo I constantly get, and people like to argue over the ruling.
Yep. Those first four cards have replacement effects that apply to Elspeth's +1 ability (CR 614.1a, 614.16). You get to decide the order that they apply, but each applies only once (CR 614.5). In any case (associative property), the result is 36 4/4 white Angel creature tokens with flying and vigilance.
@judging ftw:
Why do you think there is no partial fix? I feel like a lot of situations could be fixed by the judge if they were allowed to retroactively fix only the part of the game, which is affected by the mistake without backing up, e.g. a wrong life total, where booth players agree that it should be different several turns later. Why do you think such an option doesn't exist within the rules?
The official explanation for this is that as appealing as this might sound, it's very inconsistent. Sometimes it's very straightforward to determine what would need to be done to retroactively correct the board state, but other times it isn't. For example, let's say Amy plays a Silence with illegal mana. Then, her creature doesn't die in combat because Nick didn't play a combat trick that would have killed it. There isn't a clear way to retroactively fix just the part of the game that was affected by that mistake. Judges already display a rather high degree of variance in our opinions on whether a backup is appropriate or not in a number of real-world situations. This problem of inconsistency would be greatly magnified if judges were also responsible for determining what partial fix might be appropriate in a world where this was part of the official fix for these infractions.
@@JudgingFtW Thank you very much for the response. This question was bothering me for a while.
If a player is trying to cast a spell with mana from Selvala, Explorer Returned and doesn't generate enough mana, the spell is also backed up, right? Does that fall into a different category?
It is technically a different category. Illegal actions such as the one you described are defined under CR 730.1. The back ups Dave explains here are more so a judge's tool for resolving infractions, and so those are describe in the IPG.
The main difference is that if you start to cast a spell with Selvala and it becomes illegal, you have not committed an infraction, and the game state returns to before the casting except with Selvala's mana ability still used (not directly called a back up, but it resembles one). You would not get a warning or penalty from a judge for this unless that illegal action might gain you an advantage (enter: Panglacial Wurm).
Waiting for the Backblaze sponsorship cut
Haha, that would have been a good one. Maybe one day I'll be bigtime enough for sponsors.
Hello! I have a very burning (pun intended) question for you. In a commander (or brawl) game, if I exile kroxa, titan of death's hunger (who's my commander) from my graveyard to pay the addicional cost for the card Corpse Explosion and move kroxa from exile to the command zone, does Corpse Explosion deals the 6 damage to each creature and planeswalker?
I have seen this interaction a lot in deck discussions online but when I do this on Arena the Corpse Explosion deals 0 damage ...
In my head I think that it should deal the damage. Is it a bug on MTG Arena?
It should deal 6 damage as far as I know.
Last known information is used when determining a referenced object's characteristics after it has left the zone it was expected to be in (CR 608.2h). Kroxa was in the graveyard when the effect was applied, the game will remember the last know power of Kroxa in that zone. I am a little shaky on the CR, but at least this Oracle ruling for Corpse Explosion declares it so:
"Use the card's power as it last existed in the graveyard to determine how much damage is dealt."
@@z_o_i_n_k_s thanks for your reply! Is arena bugged then?
@@vitorroberto8694 I have to imagine it is, given that Oracle and the CR rule for the 6 damage. I see no reason why it should be 0 damage, unless Arena handles their command zone return rule as a replacement effect.
11:45 tapping a scrubland to play Brainstorm is a game loss and a warning if not a disqualification and a ban.
Depends on the context probably.
@@z_o_i_n_k_s totally. I'm talking Professional REL
According to the rules, it’s simply a Warning for the first offense
Game Play Errors only upgrade to a Game Loss after the 3rd Warning in the same category. (In this case, the category is “Game Rule Violation”, which is simply a catch-all category for Game Play Errors that don’t have a more specific definition under a different category)
Also, you can’t get DQ-ed for anything other than violations under certain “Unsporting Conduct” categories
Yes, this includes intentional Cheating. So on some level, it simply depends on the investigation performed by the judge (if any)
But the main point in my previous comment was that improperly tapping your mana is no different than any other Game Play Error from a policy perspective, so I simply explained the far more common case of an honest mistake
Anyway, as with any violation, technically you could always get Disqualified if there are additional factors that lead the judge to believe you did in on purpose to gain an advantage (which would typically fall under Cheating or Stalling… with the latter essentially being a special form of cheating that involves deliberate “Slow Play” designed to run out the clock before the opponent can win the current game)
7:43 - Wake up hun, a new corner shoot has dropped.
OR
Woah, woah, woah, you didn't explain how this would be backed up, but either way it's a doozy.
Either the resolution lets Nick (favorably) replace the card he just drew (only speaking up on a bad draw) OR he can search for a land that matches it.
It seems like not saying a word when your opponent paths, and either giving some vague gesture to continue (which could be back explained as passing priority back) and / or just hoping your opponent thinks it's on you to know to do it, then calling a judge after you see your draw, is the correct play every time.
Bear in mind that if the judge thinks you're intentionally and knowingly breaking the rules to try and garner an advantage, you will not get the chance to search for your land, but will instead get run out of the tournament with a DQ.
@@JaborWithaY I am not in favour of any rules implementation that let's the least moral and best at lying be at an advantage, though. And seems like that's how this is structured.
I'm not sure what the alternative would be? Until someone invents an infallible truth serum, any system will be vulnerable to malicious actors lying to get out of a penalty.
Yo, they added time travel to MtG
They added it a few months ago during the Dr. Who set. XD
he didn't say how did you do :O
Dark Confidant is not a "may" ability. Let's say Amy is at 1 life in your example. She "accidentally" misses the Dark Confidant trigger. Does the game back up to force her to reveal the card she drew? Does she lose the game if that card has a mana cost greater than zero? Does she lose the game even if it's a land card? As a judge, I would issue at least a match loss for cheating in this case, and possibly a ban.
That would be a missed trigger scenario. There isn't a penalty for missing one of your own beneficial triggers, but the penalty for a detrimental one is updated to a warning. Intentionally ignoring one is cheating. When it's realized that they forgot it, if it's been less than a full turn, the opponent can choose to have it be forgotten or to put it onto the stack then. Otherwise it's just forgotten.
"Upgrade: If the triggered ability is usually considered detrimental for the controlling player and they own the card responsible for the existence of the trigger, the penalty is a Warning. The current game state is not a factor in determining this, though symmetrical abilities (such as Howling Mine) may be considered usually detrimental or not depending on who is being affected"
"Players are expected to remember their own triggered abilities; intentionally ignoring one may be Unsporting Conduct - Cheating (unless the ability wouldhave no impact on the game as described above)"
"For all other triggered abilities, if the ability was missed prior to the current phase in the previousturn, instruct the players to continue playing. If the triggered ability created an effect whoseduration has already expired, instruct the players to continue playing."
"If the triggered ability isn’t covered by the previous paragraphs, the opponent chooses whether the triggered ability is added to the stack. If it is, it’s inserted at the appropriate place on the stack if possible or on the bottom of the stack. No player may make choices for the triggered ability involving objects that would not have been legal choices when the ability should have triggered. For example, if the ability instructs a player to sacrifice a creature, that player can't sacrifice a creature that wasn't on the battlefield when the ability should have triggered."
The interesting part is that deciding if a trigger is detrimental or not doesn't take into account the game state, which probably means that Dark Confidant would probably be considered beneficial since it normally is. I would still call a judge just to establish a record; missing one DC trigger during a long stressful tournament is understandable but if it happens a lot then that's a reason to suspect cheating.
Rules taken from section 2.1 of the IPG.