|
mcmagic posted:That isn't the same thing. That's a strategy decision. This is following the rules text of a permanent that is already on the board. So we're following the rules text of a card but not the rules text of... the rules? There was absolutely nothing wrong with what he did at this REL. His opponent's only job for the rest of that game was to speak the word "trigger" 5 times. That was literally the only thing he had to do. He somehow managed to not do that. If this was FNM, yes, Joe would have been wrong and super scummy. Attorney at Funk posted:I like both of their streams, but all the same Konig Vialing in Thalia in response to that Terminus trigger when Lossett only had one untapped Plains to his name broke my heart That play was beautiful. jassi007 posted:The difference to me is this. If it was on modo which enforces the rules, in your scenario your opponent can make the same non-play. However the miracles player doesn't win because the vortex trigger happens. Joe is a good player, and knew what his out was and played to it, and succeeded. I think that in general, the majority of the players would prefer the paper game to have the correct outcome as it would online with a rules engine enforcing all the rules. If you play to an out that only exists because of imperfect rules enforcement in real life, it may be legal but it will bring some amount of dissatisfaction. That's fair, but how do you perfectly enforce the rules in paper? How did these scenarios play out before MTGO existed to play the triggers for you? Even before the rules change, if Joe had forgotten or "forgotten" the trigger, what would he have gotten? A warning? To expect players to play the game for their opponent and punish them if they don't is insane. suicidesteve fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Nov 24, 2014 |
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 18:36 |
|
|
Ciprian Maricon posted:Wasn't someone asking last week if DnT was dead? They were genuinely curious and new to the format, I hope they are encouraged to build the deck like they had considered because its obviously still real good. Yeah it was me. I'm going to start pick up pieces after Christmas. Hopefully I'll be done by the next Legacy GP in Jersey.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:I won a game once because I resolved a Lili of the Veil. Without that Lili, I'm dead on board. With her I'm very likely to win. I cast Lili knowing my opponent had only Force in hand and 5 lands in play. Should I have reminded him to counter my spell? It's the honest thing to do, right? What Vortex does to the game isn't optional. Counterspelling is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:I won a game once because I resolved a Lili of the Veil. Without that Lili, I'm dead on board. With her I'm very likely to win. I cast Lili knowing my opponent had only Force in hand and 5 lands in play. Should I have reminded him to counter my spell? It's the honest thing to do, right? Not Force of Will'ing your Liliana away is a misplay. It's dumb but it's legal because nothing in the rules say they need to cast that spell even if it loses them the game. Not resolving Sulfuric Vortex's trigger is flat-out against the rules. It's illegal. The trigger is not optional. It does not say "you may deal 2 damage." It's a completely different situation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
If Lossett had a Baneslayer Angel attack and gained the 5 life with the Vortex in play and the Delver player didn't say, "You don't gain that life" no judge would actually let him gain the 5. I'm not sure why the 2 dmg should be any different.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
KidDynamite posted:Yeah it was me. I'm going to start pick up pieces after Christmas. Hopefully I'll be done by the next Legacy GP in Jersey. It's definitely worth the effort. DnT was one of the first Legacy decks I've ever built and despite getting enough stuff to build lots of other popular lists I never take it apart and pretty much take it anywhere on the off chance I get to play a few games with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
I've even argued with my judging mentor about this. It's not like you have to memorize every loving card in the game. Every format has a meta, and that determines the cards you must have familiarity with. This lack of obligation to obey the rules is condoning cheating.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:If Lossett had a Baneslayer Angel attack and gained the 5 life with the Vortex in play and the Delver player didn't say, "You don't gain that life" no judge would actually let him gain the 5. I'm not sure why the 2 dmg should be any different. One is a trigger and the other is a replacement effect or something similar.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
Kraus posted:I've even argued with my judging mentor about this. It's not like you have to memorize every loving card in the game. Every format has a meta, and that determines the cards you must have familiarity with. This lack of obligation to obey the rules is condoning cheating. No part of the rules has seen as much change in the past 3 years as the trigger policy. Every time someone suggests some new way that would totally be better and not create problems like this, it has fixed a minor issue by creating like 4 more. It's been tried, making players responsible for their opponents triggers is just worse in every way. Reene posted:Not Force of Will'ing your Liliana away is a misplay. It's dumb but it's legal because nothing in the rules say they need to cast that spell even if it loses them the game. Not resolving Sulfuric Vortex's trigger is flat-out against the rules. It's illegal. The trigger is not optional. It does not say "you may deal 2 damage." It's a completely different situation. Not reminding your opponent to resolve Sulfuric Vortex is perfectly within the rules. It is their responsibility not yours. Ciprian Maricon fucked around with this message at 05:39 on Nov 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Wow guess what, the rules say you don't have to point out someone else's triggers. You are arguing the semantics of a rule that explicitly state you are permitted to let triggers such as this slide, which is some heavy cognitive dissonance. Yes, it would be great if these triggers were automated in the vein of online, but they aren't, and they can't be, and the rules were modified to take this into account. You can argue with the intent/enforcement of the rule itself but not whether or not this is a legit play because, well, it objectively is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:36
|
|
|
I Love You! posted:Wow guess what, the rules say you don't have to point out someone else's triggers. You are arguing the semantics of a rule that explicitly state you are permitted to let triggers such as this slide, which is some heavy cognitive dissonance. Competitive Magic isn't Magic. A game isn't a game unless the players abide by the rules. The rules make the game what it is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Can you guys stop? You are all just arguing over how much you agree with each other. Camp A) Agrees that losset was not cheating, but just thinks it was a scummy play. Camp B) Agrees that the rules are kinda dumb, but that losset was following them to a T.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:If Lossett had a Baneslayer Angel attack and gained the 5 life with the Vortex in play and the Delver player didn't say, "You don't gain that life" no judge would actually let him gain the 5. I'm not sure why the 2 dmg should be any different. I don't really understand what you're saying here? Like if his opponent noticed later in the game that Joe gained 5 life he shouldn't have? He might have kept it. I had this come up recently against a friend; I attacked for 5 with a 6 power Goyf, forgetting that I had added sorcery to the 'yard on my turn. On his main phase after he cast a spell, I realized my mistake, confirmed with my friend that he should have 1 less life, and asked a nearby judge what the solution was. He said that since we had both agreed on damage, that's what happened. End of story. And that's fine, I wouldn't have wanted him to lose the life after he made choices which could have been affected by his life total. I almost didn't want to bring it up in case I was wrong and my friend did end up at -1 life because of my screwup. Either way, do you think Joe should have had to remind his opponent of something that's going to lose him the game? At what point is it too far gone to say "oh wait, I missed 2 damage from the Vortex?" Do you just not announce the triggers for 3 turns and then kindly remind your opponent he's dead? I Love You! posted:Wow guess what, the rules say you don't have to point out someone else's triggers. You are arguing the semantics of a rule that explicitly state you are permitted to let triggers such as this slide, which is some heavy cognitive dissonance. Please put this post in the OP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
Kraus posted:Competitive Magic isn't Magic. A game isn't a game unless the players abide by the rules. The rules make the game what it is. Please cite the rules that Losset failed to abide by?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
bhsman posted:Please cite the rules that Losset failed to abide by? The game doesn't give you an option not to put Vortex's trigger on the stack. You literally cannot proceed further in the game until it happens.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
Kraus posted:The game doesn't give you an option not to put Vortex's trigger on the stack. You literally cannot proceed further in the game until it happens. The game does allow for situations where, guess what, you can forget a trigger and it doesn't happen as a result. If this wasn't the case, the judge sitting next to them the entire time would have enforced the trigger and Joe likely would have lost.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
Wadjamaloo posted:Can you guys stop? You are all just arguing over how much you agree with each other. Wadjamaloo posted:Can you guys stop? You are all just arguing over how much you agree with each other. Wadjamaloo posted:Can you guys stop? You are all just arguing over how much you agree with each other.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
bhsman posted:The game does allow for situations where, guess what, you can forget a trigger and it doesn't happen as a result. If this wasn't the case, the judge sitting next to them the entire time would have enforced the trigger and Joe likely would have lost. There's no justification for that. If you forgot something that is not optional, and you understand the rules of Magic, and it's pointed out, you've got to go back, or you aren't playing Magic. What is so hard about the concept of the rules of a game as inexorable?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
Kraus posted:There's no justification for that. If you forgot something that is not optional, and you understand the rules of Magic, and it's pointed out, you've got to go back, or you aren't playing Magic. What is so hard about the concept of the rules of a game as inexorable? Probably because this isn't as iron-clad of a situation that you desperately want it to be. If it was, why did the judge say it was a missed trigger? If you want to have the course of discussion change, why not actually contribute to the thread in a way that doesn't involve spamming some quote over and over again? Here, I'll even help: Dear MTG Thread, Considering both players in the finals were notable MTGO Streamers, who are some other streamers that aren't big names like LSV or Kibler that you would recommend?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
There's tons of stuff you can do to give yourself an edge in Competitive Magic that are perfectly within the rules and policies of the game but seem kind of scummy to the casual observer. It's called Angle Shooting and some players swear by it because "you should absolutely give yourself every advantage to win" and others kind of shrug and go "nah, that's not for me." Even pro players are pretty split on the issue. It does put a smile on my face when I see examples of the opposite, though. Sam Black wrote about his last round opponent at GP New Jersey last week, who beat him easily. After the match, Sam casually asked him, a complete stranger, if he cared about Pro Points, and his opponent went "Nah, I'll concede and give you the win. Good games." I think Craig Wescoe also conceded a match on stream that went to turns because he was clearly behind on board, even though he was under no obligation to do so and a draw would've definitely been better for his standings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
You can't end a step (barring untap and certain cases of cleanup) without emptying the stack. The game puts the trigger on the stack. It's right there in 500.2. gently caress if I know what's up with judges.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:12
|
|
|
Kraus posted:The game doesn't give you an option not to put Vortex's trigger on the stack. You literally cannot proceed further in the game until it happens. Actually game rules are a completely made up social construct and always were until the advent of video games. There's literally no penalty for not following the rules of the game outside of other made-up rules. It's up to the players and/or a third party to ensure the rules are followed, but since humans are imperfect and incapable of remembering everything sometimes people will forget. The current philosophy for missed triggers is this: quote:Triggered abilities are common and invisible, so players should not be harshly penalized when forgetting about one. Players are expected to remember their own triggered abilities; intentionally ignoring one may be Unsporting Conduct — Cheating (unless the ability would have no impact on the game as described above). Even if an opponent is involved in the announcement or resolution of the ability, the controller is still responsible for ensuring the opponents make the appropriate choices and take the appropriate actions. Opponents are not required to point out triggered abilities that they do not control, though they may do so if they wish. And its remedy is quote:If the triggered ability specifies a default action associated with a choice made by the controller (usually "If you don't ..." or "... unless"), resolve it choosing the default option. If the triggered ability is a delayed triggered ability that changes the zone of an object, resolve it. For these two types of abilities, the opponent chooses whether to resolve the ability the next time a player would get priority or when a player would get priority at the start of the next phase. These abilities do not expire and should be remedied no matter how much time has passed since they should have triggered. A few reasons why this system is good:
Sure there are reasons to go with other systems but they decided to go with this one because so far it's caused the least amount of problems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
Kraus posted:You can't end a step (barring untap and certain cases of cleanup) without emptying the stack. The game puts the trigger on the stack. It's right there in 500.2. If a player misses a trigger, it doesn't go on the stack in the first place. It's right there in 4.4 of the Tournament Rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
Do we have an MTGO Pauper thread? I've been getting into it lately and it's a super sweet format. It's like Legacy's younger brother: a diverse format where every idiot is playing UR Delver/Cruise variants and you can pick up a lot of free wins.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
Kraus posted:There's no justification for that. If you forgot something that is not optional, and you understand the rules of Magic, and it's pointed out, you've got to go back, or you aren't playing Magic. What is so hard about the concept of the rules of a game as inexorable? The rules allow you to miss your own triggers. This should be the only sentence necessary here. Do you know why most triggers aren't optional these days? It's because the MTGO programmers complained about having to program so many prompts for triggers for "may" effects. It's not because they wanted these to be guaranteed to happen 100% of the time, it's because they have lazy/incompetent programmers. And again, how far back do you go to fix a missed trigger? Do you skip it for 5 turns and remind your opponent to take 10? What if they made decisions based on not having lost that life? What if they legitimately forgot the trigger? Do you just undo the last 5 turns and start over? How do you determine which cards were drawn? How do you unshuffle after a fetch? Wadjamaloo posted:Can you guys stop? You are all just arguing over how much you agree with each other. It's better than 3 pages of Gamergate or whatever. Anyway, this conversation has been beaten pretty well to death and I'm pretty sure I've said everything I have to say. DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:Do we have an MTGO Pauper thread? I've been getting into it lately and it's a super sweet format. It's like Legacy's younger brother: a diverse format where every idiot is playing UR Delver/Cruise variants and you can pick up a lot of free wins. I built a deck a few days ago but I haven't had a chance to play it yet. Were you the one I was talking to the other day?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
bhsman posted:Dear MTG Thread, By twitch names: NumotTheNummy (Kenji Egashira), dzyl (Jan van der Vegt), MattiasNL (also often found skyping with Jan), greghatch (Greg Hatch, rarely streams anymore but it's amazing when he does), calebdmtg (Caleb Durward, I guess he's a big name but he just started streaming recently). v4's system requirements knocked out most all of the smaller streamers I used to watch, sadly. These days it's mostly just Numot, the EU guys and the Channel Fireball crew who are on consistently.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:Do you know why most triggers aren't optional these days? It's because the MTGO programmers complained about having to program so many prompts for triggers for "may" effects. It's not because they wanted these to be guaranteed to happen 100% of the time, it's because they have lazy/incompetent programmers. Do you have a source for this? My impression was that the MTGO devs don't really have any influence on card design
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:46
|
|
|
It's cool guys, Lossett seems like such a nice guy, he wouldn't angle shoot or whatever the term is like that Alex fellow. Or that other fellow who was well loved until he got banned too. *2 years later, Lossett is also outed as a regular cheater* But he was such a nice guy 
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
There's a paper pauper tournament next weekend if anybody in the Minnesota metro area is interested.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
vOv posted:Do you have a source for this? My impression was that the MTGO devs don't really have any influence on card design Maro said something about this in one of his recent-ish podcasts - probably a few months ago. He said their original plan was to make these things "may" abilities to prevent this kind of stupidity from happening and to give people more options, but the developers complained about having to program all the prompts for every trigger so they changed it to mostly not optional.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:
Yup, that was me. MisterOblivious posted:There's a paper pauper tournament next weekend if anybody in the Minnesota metro area is interested. Pauper is cool but paper pauper is kind of stupid unless you're playing with the MTGO banlist because both Sinkhole and Hymn to Tourach are legal in paper. Glad to see they are abiding by it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:51
|
|
|
vOv posted:Do you have a source for this? My impression was that the MTGO devs don't really have any influence on card design There have been card designs that were rejected for MTGO impracticality.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:51
|
|
|
Ranpire posted:By twitch names: NumotTheNummy (Kenji Egashira), dzyl (Jan van der Vegt), MattiasNL (also often found skyping with Jan), greghatch (Greg Hatch, rarely streams anymore but it's amazing when he does), calebdmtg (Caleb Durward, I guess he's a big name but he just started streaming recently). v4's system requirements knocked out most all of the smaller streamers I used to watch, sadly. These days it's mostly just Numot, the EU guys and the Channel Fireball crew who are on consistently. Awesome, I'll add these and give them a watch. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:You aren't playing EDH/Commander at that point, though. You're playing freeform. What do you call the game that is exactly commander except you get a free mulligan?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
Don't listen to Toshimo. He's wrong. Right from the Commander/EDH Rules page: quote:Locally players often play with house rules, and are encouraged to Commander is the very definition of "play by whatever rules everyone agrees upon because we just came up with this format for funsies".
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
bhsman posted:Considering both players in the finals were notable MTGO Streamers, who are some other streamers that aren't big names like LSV or Kibler that you would recommend? modogrinder1 is an extremely good limited player and a great streamer to watch. His limited rating generally hovers around 1950-2000. edit: also Michael Jacobs (darkest_mage) is decent, if you like someone who plays well but who also is miserable and negative about everything MiddleEastBeast fucked around with this message at 07:10 on Nov 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:00
|
|
|
vOv posted:Do you have a source for this? My impression was that the MTGO devs don't really have any influence on card design It's not due to lazy programmers, it's because players complained about clicking yes a billion times. It made soul's attendant materially more annoying to play with than soul warden, for example. Now they're conscientious about triggers and prompts when designing new cards.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:09
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:It's not due to lazy programmers, it's because players complained about clicking yes a billion times. It made soul's attendant materially more annoying to play with than soul warden, for example. Now they're conscientious about triggers and prompts when designing new cards. I don't play modo, but forge has a thing where you can choose to "always accept" to a specific optional ability. Does that not exist in modo?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:11
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:Maro said something about this in one of his recent-ish podcasts - probably a few months ago. He said their original plan was to make these things "may" abilities to prevent this kind of stupidity from happening and to give people more options, but the developers complained about having to program all the prompts for every trigger so they changed it to mostly not optional. Right but wrong; MTGO was influential but the issue isn't that devs didn't want to add the prompts, it's that it makes things more tedious for the players when the game has to stop every few seconds like that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 18:36 |
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:I don't play modo, but forge has a thing where you can choose to "always accept" to a specific optional ability. Does that not exist in modo? It does exist - right-clicking on the ability on the stack gives you a bunch of options for automatically dealing with it - you can automatically pass and let that trigger resolve whenever it happens, and if it's your trigger, you also get the option to automatically say yes or no when it resolves. Unfortunately (much like the "m" hotkey), it's not particularly discoverable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:34
|
|