|
Some Numbers posted:Fine, Slaughter Games. Exact same circumstances and a card you might see at FNM. At FNM as a judge I'm not going to dick people around about being super clear when they're passing priority. FNM isn't about tight competitive play. That said, at FNM it's still perfectly OK to be all like "Slaughter Games naming Searing Blood" and your opponent is all "Searing Blood in response" and you're all like "Whelp then I change my mind" because that's how the card works, you don't need to commit until it's resolving. Fox of Stone posted:Hey, let's take it a step further while we're at it. A lot of times the opponent quickly reveals their hand after responding and before you get a chance to rename - it's just a habit and one of those tricky timing situations that's better solved by MTGO. You see their new hand and opponents can show their hand at any time if they so wish. You argue that you still get to choose a different card. Judge comes over, and assuming he sides with you, you see they now have a FoW, blue useless spell, and a Jace they drew since the last time you've seen their hand. You call out the Jace. Let's say I'm the judge who gets called over. There are three possibilities: active player purposefully didn't communicate that he was changing his named card as the spell was resolving (he is cheating); non-active player tried to rush through the resolution of Cabal Therapy to give active player a chance to change his named card after the response (he's being unsporting and/or cheating); or non-active player accidentally revealed his hand too early. If it's not #3, this is going to be an incredibly lovely judge call. ScarletBrother posted:Yeah, I have never played with Cabal Therapy and I'm borrowing Dredge to play in a Legacy event coming up at the LGS, so I am trying to do my homework so I don't muck it up. Most of this is really fiddly tournament procedure stuff. If you want to avoid all of it, just don't name anything with Cabal Therapy until the spell is resolving, and if they ask "naming?", ask them, "does it resolve?" This will make you more friends than trying to gotcha people with priority passes.
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:09 |
|
|
Saeku posted:Most of this is really fiddly tournament procedure stuff. If you want to avoid all of it, just don't name anything with Cabal Therapy until the spell is resolving, and if they ask "naming?", ask them, "does it resolve?" This will make you more friends than trying to gotcha people with priority passes. This is just an SCGIQ and I am friends with most of the people who will be playing. They guys who play Legacy near me are really cool and laid back. I will just go with the option of asking if it resolves before naming a card.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
So now Fracturing Gust (2 G/W G/W G/W-Instant-Destroy all artifacts and enchantments. Gain 2 life for each thing destroyed) is $15 after a buyout. Considering the only deck that uses it (Scapeshift) only wants one copy in the sideboard, the only thing that could conceivably prop up this spike is EDH demand. I'd sell into the spike if you have any. Edit: Also SCG is now buying Misty Rainforest and Scalding Tarn at $70. ZEN fetches are going up again soon. Promoted Pawn fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Mar 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
ScarletBrother posted:This is just an SCGIQ and I am friends with most of the people who will be playing. They guys who play Legacy near me are really cool and laid back. I will just go with the option of asking if it resolves before naming a card. That would be the best thing in that situation, and most of them in general. Talk to your opponent, make sure the stack and board position is organized, avoid ambiguity if you can, and generally be a Good Player to the best of your ability. If there's still issues, the judges are there for you, the players, not because they were just passing by and thought they'd check in. Unsure of the exact timing of a spell (Orzhov Charm example from earlier, or Cabal Coffers now)? Afraid you (or your opponent) has mucked something up on accident? Need an interaction clarified? That's why they're there. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
Saeku posted:At FNM as a judge I'm not going to dick people around about being super clear when they're passing priority. FNM isn't about tight competitive play. That said, at FNM it's still perfectly OK to be all like "Slaughter Games naming Searing Blood" and your opponent is all "Searing Blood in response" and you're all like "Whelp then I change my mind" because that's how the card works, you don't need to commit until it's resolving. But is it okay to say "no, you can't cast it at all because the spell is already resolving and you missed your window?" Or is that when you start being a dick?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:But is it okay to say "no, you can't cast it at all because the spell is already resolving and you missed your window?" Better idea is to cast it properly and not name a card until the spell resolves? I don't think it's that difficult.... Same thing happens all the time with Detention Sphere, you don't choose a target upon casting it, you choose when the ability is put on the stack AFTER it's on the battlefield. It's not difficult at all to be responsible for things being ordered properly since you're the one casting it and should understand the card: I cast Detention Sphere. Target? Has the Sphere resolved? Yes. Enters the battlefield, target ____ with the ability. No need to be a dick about anything, just play properly for gently caress's sake and it solves itself.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:But is it okay to say "no, you can't cast it at all because the spell is already resolving and you missed your window?" At FNM, the rules for judges are basically just "be chill, use common sense." These should also be your principles as a player.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
BaronVonVaderham posted:Better idea is to cast it properly and not name a card until the spell resolves? I don't think it's that difficult.... Sorry, I'm not being clear. This is the hypothetical I'm thinking about : Me: Slaughter Games? Opp: Naming? Me: [card name] Opp: Cast [card name] in response.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
Promoted Pawn posted:Edit: Also SCG is now buying Misty Rainforest and Scalding Tarn at $70. ZEN fetches are going up again soon. I eagerly await Zendikar Wars II: Attack of the (Eldrazi) Drones finally allowing me to work on a modern deck without taking out a mortgage on my house.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:Sorry, I'm not being clear. This is the hypothetical I'm thinking about : Me: Slaughter Games? Opp: Naming? Me: Games resolves? Opp: Yes. Me: [card name]. OR Me: Slaughter Games? Opp: Naming? Me: [card name] Opp: Cast [card name] in response. Me: OK, now I can and will change my choice, and will wait until Games resolves to name anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:Sorry, I'm not being clear. This is the hypothetical I'm thinking about :
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:Sorry, I'm not being clear. This is the hypothetical I'm thinking about : If they say naming? just ask if it resolves, they can't counter it so why even give them an opening?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Saeku posted:Let's say I'm the judge who gets called over. There are three possibilities: active player purposefully didn't communicate that he was changing his named card as the spell was resolving (he is cheating); non-active player tried to rush through the resolution of Cabal Therapy to give active player a chance to change his named card after the response (he's being unsporting and/or cheating); or non-active player accidentally revealed his hand too early. If it's not #3, this is going to be an incredibly lovely judge call. Well yeah, see? That's why it's a fun thought experiment! It's similar to that famous story of a guy making eye contact and passing priority, losing the chance to revive some vengevines. Promoted Pawn posted:So now Fracturing Gust (2 G/W G/W G/W-Instant-Destroy all artifacts and enchantments. Gain 2 life for each thing destroyed) is $15 after a buyout. Considering the only deck that uses it (Scapeshift) only wants one copy in the sideboard, the only thing that could conceivably prop up this spike is EDH demand. I'd sell into the spike if you have any.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
Promoted Pawn posted:So now Fracturing Gust (2 G/W G/W G/W-Instant-Destroy all artifacts and enchantments. Gain 2 life for each thing destroyed) is $15 after a buyout. Considering the only deck that uses it (Scapeshift) only wants one copy in the sideboard, the only thing that could conceivably prop up this spike is EDH demand. I'd sell into the spike if you have any. Jeez, I remember when I bought my set of Tarns for like $30 a pop last year and thought that was a bit steep. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
Some Numbers posted:Sorry, I'm not being clear. This is the hypothetical I'm thinking about : Oh, I was picturing a different scenario there. As a judge I'd probably back you up on "no, it's too late" since A) it's the technical answer and B) your opponent either misinterpreted how your card works, or is trying to fish for information they shouldn't have. Then I'd tell you all the stuff that various people have said in the thread about how Slaughter Games works. At FNM, the judges' focus is to make sure that if players make a mistake or miscommunication it's fixed in a fair way and they get the information needed to not repeat it. Not to enforce a high standard of technical play. Fox of Stone posted:Well yeah, see? That's why it's a fun thought experiment! It's similar to that famous story of a guy making eye contact and passing priority, losing the chance to revive some vengevines. Being involved in a cheating investigation, even as a judge, is the opposite of everything that "fun" is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
revengeanceful posted:Okay, let's clear this up once and for all. At FNM or any other Regular REL event or playing casually with your buddies, after they ask "Naming?", you ask "Does it resolve?". If they say yes, then you name your card and we're all good. If they say "No, I have a response", they get to do that. At Competitive REL and above, after they say "Naming?", the spell is assumed to have resolved, you get to name your card and they no longer have a chance to respond. Not that hard, I don't think. Then I would instead say, "Do you have a response? Once I name a card you no longer have priority to cast something." Cactrot posted:If they say naming? just ask if it resolves, they can't counter it so why even give them an opening? I do this because it's a good habit to get into in general so you don't move straight into your second spell only to have your opponent back you up and say, "Hey, I never had a chance to respond to the first spell, after seeing that second spell I definitely want to counter it." (which they have the right to call a judge to do if you don't get an acknowledgement that your spell resolved) It's also a REALLY good habit for competitive play, as sometimes you can bait them out. I've had people fizzle Dissolves on my Mistcutter Hydras by simply asking, "Response?" after casting one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Hello I'm fairly new to MTG and would appreciate some advice. I've done a FNM and the BOTG gameday so far and am definitely having fun. I'm playing my own version of red deck wins because it was cheap and red was recommended to me by the store owner since it's fairly newbie friendly. I'll post my decklist below and I would like suggestions on play style. Specifically how to play my burn spells. Is it better to burn enemy creatures and let mine do the work, or do I want to target the other player every time? I understand it's situational but I'm playing off of purely guesswork and table talk advice. 4 Frostburn Weird 4 Ash Zealot 4 Burning-Tree Emissary 4 Rakdos Cackler 4 Fanatic of Mogis 2 Boros Reckoner 2 Satyr Firedancer 2 Riot Piker 1 Chandra, Pyromaster 4 Magma Jet 4 Shock 3 Lightning Strike 22 Mountains
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Saeku posted:Being involved in a cheating investigation, even as a judge, is the opposite of everything that "fun" is. A friend was commiserating last night over beers about being DQed while in top 8 contention at a GP. It was Innistrad limited, and he was looking around the table to see if anyone had taken a first pick werewolf of import. Which if you played back then was a huge signal (mayor of avabruck, or especially bloodline keeper said stay out of that colour). Anyways at that moment Ben start put his hand way out in front of him and tilted the cards back, and they called him for cheating observing another player's hand. They made him go in the back and write a statement. Months later he would hear back whether an additional investigation would later ban him. Just lovely all around for something he couldn't possibly have avoided.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:This isn't an interesting card interaction as much as it is abusing a rule. That rule regarding shortcuts is designed to allow players to feel comfortable using common shortcuts without risking being penalized for it. If i'm playing kn a tournament at comp. REL with a large prize I will absolutely use every advantage I can get within the rules. If i know the rules better than you that should give me an advantage. The assumption is that everyone at comp. REL should know the rules fully, and if you don't and get punished for it that's on you. At the very least people should know its possible to avoid getting tricked. Trying to sweep it under the rug is silly. Even if you think they are scummy, you should still know how they work and play to win with the rules as written not rules as intended.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:When you intentionally set out to use a shortcut and the rules surrounding them to gain an advantage you are abusing the rules and are an rear end in a top hat. Using the shortcut, because you want to use the shortcut, and then changing your choice if an opponent responds is perfectly acceptable. Using the shortcut every time in hopes that you can use the rules to trick an unwary opponent now and then, is not. I heard a story from a friend recently about his bad old days chainplaying L5R. He was talking about a deck he ran that had a repeatable mechanic of playing some resource (I don't know L5R) to see your opponent's hand. He would spend a few turns tapping that resource and saying "By this rule, can I see your hand?" and then after a while in the same game would just say "Can I see your hand?" in an attempt to circumvent paying the resource. When called on it, he would just say he was asking in general. I am not familiar enough with the L5R playstyle to know if this is douchey play or not. I do know I hate it when people try to chatter up the table by asking you vaguely-game related stuff during the game, like "Would you like to concede?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
morning wood posted:Hello I'm fairly new to MTG and would appreciate some advice. I've done a FNM and the BOTG gameday so far and am definitely having fun. I'm playing my own version of red deck wins because it was cheap and red was recommended to me by the store owner since it's fairly newbie friendly. I'll post my decklist below and I would like suggestions on play style. Specifically how to play my burn spells. Is it better to burn enemy creatures and let mine do the work, or do I want to target the other player every time? I understand it's situational but I'm playing off of purely guesswork and table talk advice. I would also say Goblin Shortcutter is better than Riot Piker, because he lets your guys get through. I'd also replace some number of Shocks (probably all of them) with Electrickery or Dynacharge because Sylvan Caryatid just ruins your day forever. Dynacharge will also let you randomly win the game sometimes, though it's a terrible topdeck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
morning wood posted:Specifically how to play my burn spells. Is it better to burn enemy creatures and let mine do the work, or do I want to target the other player every time? I understand it's situational but I'm playing off of purely guesswork and table talk advice. You're right, it's very situational and really the best way is to just play and figure it out through experience. A Frostburn Weird that can get through multiple turns is usually worth more than the 2 damage the Shock that killed their blocker. The trick is identifying what is genuinely a threat. A 1/1 is not usually a valid concern if you've got a 2/2 Rakdos Cackler that is going through every turn. If a creature is giving your opponent cards, a repeatable source of non-combat damage or has the potential to get big (Heroic, etc). It is good to consider offing them when you can. Sometimes, though, the correct answer is to go straight for their face with the burn spells. Go figure. A big thing is timing. Your instant-speed burn should typically be done on the end of an opponent's turn when able, in response to your opponent targeting their own things. But poo poo if you have a Satyr Firedancer out go all out. That dude owns.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
theironjef posted:I heard a story from a friend recently about his bad old days chainplaying L5R. He was talking about a deck he ran that had a repeatable mechanic of playing some resource (I don't know L5R) to see your opponent's hand. He would spend a few turns tapping that resource and saying "By this rule, can I see your hand?" and then after a while in the same game would just say "Can I see your hand?" in an attempt to circumvent paying the resource. When called on it, he would just say he was asking in general. I am not familiar enough with the L5R playstyle to know if this is douchey play or not. I do know I hate it when people try to chatter up the table by asking you vaguely-game related stuff during the game, like "Would you like to concede?" concedingplayersayswhat
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
Fox of Stone posted:Wow, that is fun and ridiculous. I still have a couple foil tarns somewhere Congratulations, if they're still NM they're probably going to be worth more than $200 each very soon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
Death Bot posted:concedingplayersayswhat Isn't L5R the game where there's a rule that you lose Victory Points or life or whatever if you touch their card (to spin it around and read it) without asking permission, bowing and throwing salt in the air in a ceremony first?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Tharizdun posted:Isn't L5R the game where there's a rule that you lose Victory Points or life or whatever if you touch their card (to spin it around and read it) without asking permission, bowing and throwing salt in the air in a ceremony first? If it is why aren't we all playing that game?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:If it is why aren't we all playing that game? It's a fat white boys in kimonos card game. It's a card game for LARPers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
So I just pulled a foil elspeth I have no loving idea whether to keep it or sell it, I kinda wanted two for murdergoats white splash but I don't exactly need it foil and have one already, so what should I do with it? Will it hold it's value?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Samael posted:So I just pulled a foil elspeth Sell it/trade it for value. I pulled a foil Kiora and used it to finish my playsets of Shocklands, even though I still want Kioras. I'll just win/trade for those.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:28
|
|
|
It probably won't move down much while it is in standard unless somehow W/x control is completely unviable post Ducks block rotation(which hasn't been true for years). It will drop a lot when it rotates out of standard. I'd still be inclined to ditch it for a non-foil plus some other poo poo if you can find the trade. Foils are sometimes hard to move.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:28
|
|
|
I asked a couple of rules question about Xenagos' -6 ability a page or so back, and I just had one more. If my opponent reveals 2 Polukranos from the -6, can he choose to put both on the battlefield and activate monstrosity using one of them before he places it into the graveyard due to Legendary rule?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
No. Whenever a player would get priority state based stuff is checked, and one person controlling two of the same Legend forces them to knock one in the yard before they can do anything else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
qbert posted:I asked a couple of rules question about Xenagos' -6 ability a page or so back, and I just had one more. If my opponent reveals 2 Polukranos from the -6, can he choose to put both on the battlefield and activate monstrosity using one of them before he places it into the graveyard due to Legendary rule? Nope. Legend rule is a stated-based action, which means that it gets applied if any player would have priority, before that player can actually do anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
qbert posted:I asked a couple of rules question about Xenagos' -6 ability a page or so back, and I just had one more. If my opponent reveals 2 Polukranos from the -6, can he choose to put both on the battlefield and activate monstrosity using one of them before he places it into the graveyard due to Legendary rule? No the creatures will both be placed onto the field at the same time, and making choices for the legendary rule is a special action which doesn't use the stack. Your opponent will not have the opportunity to use any spells or abilities before dealing with the legendary rule. The destruction effect is also a state based action, doesn't use the stack, and cannot be prevented in anyway. Ciprian Maricon fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Mar 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
When RTR rotates UW is royally boned. Unless they really want to reprint replacements for sphinx, verdict, det sphere, AOT jace, syncopate, etc, UW and esper control are going to be in a bad place. The first two in particular are just insanely good to the point where modern/legacy decks run them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Mortimer posted:The first two in particular are just insanely good to the point where modern/legacy decks run them. You need to understand how much of a relief this is. Because I have some extra Revs I just cannot move right now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
Don't be that relieved. They aren't anywhere near as major players. I don't think Rev sees play in any major legacy deck and it's certainly not a modern staple. It's usable, but it's significantly worse than in standard because modern is a much faster format.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Mortimer posted:When RTR rotates UW is royally boned. Unless they really want to reprint replacements for sphinx, verdict, det sphere, AOT jace, syncopate, etc, UW and esper control are going to be in a bad place. Reprint Stroke of Genius, Wrath of God, Oblivion Ring and Night of Souls' Betrayal and Power Sink 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
I think ill wait until brimaz go down and see if I can do foil elspeth for elspeth + brimaz.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:09 |
|
|
Mortimer posted:When RTR rotates UW is royally boned. Unless they really want to reprint replacements for sphinx, verdict, det sphere, AOT jace, syncopate, etc, UW and esper control are going to be in a bad place. Good, gently caress those decks. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 23:51
|
|
