|
Bulky Bartokomous posted:So this is pretty widespread? I think I'll stick to MTGO for a while until I get better caught up on all the new rules and mechanics. You'll get the typical reply of "depends on your local community" but yes this is very much widespread. Lots of dumb nerds try to play all sorts of gotcha games. The famous one was ~6 years ago when someone who can't read body language claimed that "staring" at your opponent automatically passes priority.
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:10 |
|
|
Nothing will ever top someone casting Esper Charm and saying: "targeting myself."
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:both scg events and gps avoid major us cities for what i assume are financial reasons renting space in Chicago is insanely expensive. On par with NYC and SF, and it makes no sense
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Bulky Bartokomous posted:So this is pretty widespread? I think I'll stick to MTGO for a while until I get better caught up on all the new rules and mechanics. In general, I would say no. But that being said it's a mixed bag. If your store is a more competitive one with an actual judge there is a higher likelihood of people following the rules / tight play. Scummier players at this store that are dreaming of being a PT champion might try to rules lawyer, but frequently these stores are usually the best to play at because they self regulate pretty well Casual stores without an actual judge and less competitive play will probably be a bit more loose in terms of rules understanding and enforcement plus you get in to the weird situations where the regulars are buddy-buddy with the person who runs the store and they might be favored. Prerelease events are the best/worst to go to - they are usually a cluster gently caress in terms of player knowledge, you'll have people that have followed the spoilers, understand the new mechanics and show up ready to play, and then you'll have people that (1) haven't played in 10 years but walked by the other day and saw that people still play magic, (2) play prereleases in the store and the rest of the time do kitchen table magic only where the rules are whatever they want them to be, or (3) have never played magic before and want to try it out. Go to stores with good judging staff for these. I'd say the bulk of magic players (98%) are reasonable, non-cheating people, it's just the negative experiences we have once in a while really stand out from the good one. Like MTGO, the majority of the time people might only type "good luck" or "hi" in the chat if they interact at all but you remember the grumpy people that bitch you out because you're "a loving lucksack" or "a lovely player" Tl;dr - like real life lovely people are around but if you go to a good store that has an actual judge you'll probably run into less of these types, if they do a "beginners night" or "learn to play magic" type events then you're probably in the right spot. Dehtraen fucked around with this message at 16:25 on May 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
Star Man posted:Nothing will ever top someone casting Esper Charm and saying: "targeting myself." Did they try to gotcha their opponent while doing so? If they did that definitely is the best self-own.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Did they try to gotcha their opponent while doing so? If they did that definitely is the best self-own. Someone did that against Cedric and he called a judge to force the guy to discard 2.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:31
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Did they try to gotcha their opponent while doing so? If they did that definitely is the best self-own. It's a famous-ish story by Cedric Phillips, with his opponent declaring "Esper Charm, targeting myself", Cedric asking him to confirm, then Cedric calling a judge to confirm, his opponent insisting "Esper Charm, targeting myself", and having to resolve it, with the judge present. Someone probably has the link to it somewhere, I just am on my phone and can't look it up atm
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
There's the gotcha/cheats, but also a lot of people are just biased on how they want to understand cards depending on whether they or their opponent are casting them.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:You'll get the typical reply of "depends on your local community" but yes this is very much widespread. Lots of dumb nerds try to play all sorts of gotcha games. The famous one was ~6 years ago when someone who can't read body language claimed that "staring" at your opponent automatically passes priority. Lets put it this way, every store has at least one and it doesn't get better when bigger prizes are at stake. The better opponents, the better the angle shooting gets. Owen Turtenwald for example got paired up against a few people I know at GP san antonio. They sit down and immediately owen yells "Judge". What was the reason for this judge call? Well, this...  Owen notices his opponent had this type of deckbox. Because a deckbox like this can hold two decks, he is concerned his opponent has more than his 75 in the box. Of course owen isn't really worried that this is going on but is hoping this is going on so he can get a free win. Just one of many silly angles you play because its free ev to do so. Serperoth posted:It's a famous-ish story by Cedric Phillips, with his opponent declaring "Esper Charm, targeting myself", Cedric asking him to confirm, then Cedric calling a judge to confirm, his opponent insisting "Esper Charm, targeting myself", and having to resolve it, with the judge present. I believe that the rules don't even allow this to happen this way anymore thank goodness.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Lets put it this way, every store has at least one and it doesn't get better when bigger prizes are at stake. The better opponents, the better the angle shooting gets. I hope that Owen opened the other side and it turns out it was a jack in the
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Lets put it this way, every store has at least one and it doesn't get better when bigger prizes are at stake. The better opponents, the better the angle shooting gets. I've mentioned this before, but playing at the Game Center in Seattle there was a tactic in which you could force an opponent to de-sleeve and then call the judge for marked cards. One guy tried to pull this every match during one Standard tournament and I believe was convinced never to return by other patrons.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Lets put it this way, every store has at least one and it doesn't get better when bigger prizes are at stake. The better opponents, the better the angle shooting gets. Did he really do that multiple times? That is quite scumy.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Did he really do that multiple times? That is quite scumy. It was just once at this tournament that I know of. The point is that owen didn't talk to his opponent at all, owen didn't observe any behavior he thought was strange, he simply called a judge based on a very popular deckbox because he thought he could get a free win. Its probably a safe assumption that he does this often, especially in day 1.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
En Fuego posted:I've mentioned this before, but playing at the Game Center in Seattle there was a tactic in which you could force an opponent to de-sleeve and then call the judge for marked cards. One guy tried to pull this every match during one Standard tournament and I believe was convinced never to return by other patrons. Did the convincing involve profanity and threats of physical violence? Would have been well deserved imo.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
Sickening posted:I believe that the rules don't even allow this to happen this way anymore thank goodness. I don't like angling for stuff like that, but Cedric gave ample opportunity to realise it, in my opinion. From his initial confirmation, to calling a judge, etc. Could have just said "if you do that, you'll discard two", but at the same time it's not his job to correct misplays.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Did he really do that multiple times? That is quite scumy. people try that. i judge a good bit and you see that stuff. Lot of us dont tolerate it.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:I don't like angling for stuff like that, but Cedric gave ample opportunity to realise it, in my opinion. From his initial confirmation, to calling a judge, etc. Could have just said "if you do that, you'll discard two", but at the same time it's not his job to correct misplays. Cedric knew his opponents intentions which is basically the biggest issue to me. He knew he was trying to draw cards, his opponent then attempts to draw cards, and he scums his opponent out based on wording. I am glad the rules have evolved since then.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
Really dumb question that I've always had: is there priority at the end of either main phase? For instance, I know that you can do things at the end of an opponent's draw step. Can I do things at the end of the opponent's precombat main phase?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Yep, go nuts.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
Bulky Bartokomous posted:Did the convincing involve profanity and threats of physical violence? Would have been well deserved imo. Pretty sure actual violence. I ran with a bad wizard crowd in my youth.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
We're gonna kick your rear end! Roll for initiative.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Shadow225 posted:Really dumb question that I've always had: is there priority at the end of either main phase? For instance, I know that you can do things at the end of an opponent's draw step. Can I do things at the end of the opponent's precombat main phase? You have to agree to move through any part of the turn... Except Begin Combat... Maybe...
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Star Man posted:Nothing will ever top someone casting Esper Charm and saying: "targeting myself." I'm still a fan of the burn player at GPNJ bolting my Goyf on his turn 2 after I turn 1 Thoughtseized a Goblin Guide and he turn 1 Lava Spiked me. I lost that match obviously because there's no justice in this game. Sickening posted:Cedric knew his opponents intentions which is basically the biggest issue to me. He knew he was trying to draw cards, his opponent then attempts to draw cards, and he scums his opponent out based on wording. I am glad the rules have evolved since then. The nice thing about this game is your cards do exactly what you tell them to do. I'm not even disagreeing with you, but it's the Borborygmos/Enraged thing again. There were a bunch of ways to resolve it that didn't involve losing the game but they went with the one way that loses. Of course that was Bob Huang, so it was extra scummy.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
I dunno, if I dropped all that money to go to a Grand Prix, the last thing I'm going to do is let someone perform an action that their words aren't describing. I already have to deal with people wanting to do "gentlemen's mulligans" at FNM.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Cedric knew his opponents intentions which is basically the biggest issue to me. He knew he was trying to draw cards, his opponent then attempts to draw cards, and he scums his opponent out based on wording. I am glad the rules have evolved since then. It's a pretty hard line to say that going by what your opponent says they are doing, rather than what they intend to do, is scumming. Especially at a GP; not knowing what your cards do and hoping your opponent will just let you slide on it is pretty bad as well. Say you attack with two creatures, and I block one and let lethal damage through. Then I say "whoops I meant to block the other one." Can I argue that you should've known my intent and obviously I made a mistake, and you're being scummy if you don't let me take it back? Edit: suicidesteve posted:The nice thing about this game is your cards do exactly what you tell them to do. I'm not even disagreeing with you, but it's the Borborygmos/Enraged thing again. There were a bunch of ways to resolve it that didn't involve losing the game but they went with the one way that loses. Of course that was Bob Huang, so it was extra scummy. If I remember correctly this was different because it was Standard, and Borborygmos wasn't in the format already. So can you name a card with Pithing Needle that isn't even in the format you're playing? If I drop a Needle in Modern and name Deathrite Shaman, can I take that back? PhyrexianLibrarian fucked around with this message at 18:00 on May 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
It was modern, not standard.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
PhyrexianLibrarian posted:
Are we at a GP or other comp REL event and you've had time to think about it while I waited? Then yeah, you're dead. It's happened to me before where my opponent did that and when they realized it they scooped without arguing, next game. quote:Edit: The Borborygmos thing was at a modern event where both Borbs were technically legal. Everyone knew what he meant when he said Borborygmos. Technically Huang was right but it still felt scummy to everyone watching.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
Actually Huang was cool with it but it was a feature match and the judge there overheard it and paused the game and forced the dude to abide by the letter of the rules.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Fingers McLongDong posted:The Borborygmos thing was at a modern event where both Borbs were technically legal. Everyone knew what he meant when he said Borborygmos. Technically Huang was right but it still felt scummy to everyone watching. Fair, but "holding your opponent to what they said in-game" is a lot different from "angle shooting based on a deckbox before the match starts." One is following the rules of the game, one is actively trying to circumvent the rules in bad faith.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Actually Huang was cool with it but it was a feature match and the judge there overheard it and paused the game and forced the dude to abide by the letter of the rules. Are you sure? By the replay I saw he attempts to bolt with a land and his opponent points to needle and then things go off the rails. Its like when he also "forgot" to destroy his own top with explosives and then continued to use it after the judge couldn't rewind it. People who openly use petty edges like this probably don't have any shame in less legal things either. PhyrexianLibrarian posted:Fair, but "holding your opponent to what they said in-game" is a lot different from "angle shooting based on a deckbox before the match starts." One is following the rules of the game, one is actively trying to circumvent the rules in bad faith. Both are attempting to use rules outside their intended uses.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Shadow225 posted:Really dumb question that I've always had: is there priority at the end of either main phase? For instance, I know that you can do things at the end of an opponent's draw step. Can I do things at the end of the opponent's precombat main phase? Other people have already covered this, but basically phase changes only happen when both players pass priority on an empty stack, which means that you'll have an opportunity to do things proactively on any phase on any turn. Simple example: Opponent casts Nessian Courser. They pass priority. You pass priority. Nessian Courser resolves. They pass priority (wanting to move to combat or maybe declare attackers) You cast Doom Blade. They pass priority. You pass priority. Doom Blade resolves. They pass priority. You pass priority. Game moves to beginning of combat. Now, the reasons you'd actually want to do this are pretty rare, but not nonexistent. In the last limited format, killing your opponent's Weldfast Engineer during precombat main can be sensible. Even in Legacy, if you're playing Death and Taxes and have a Stoneforge Mystic and an Aether Vial on 3 out with a Flickerwisp in hand, you'll frequently want to vial in the wisp on opponents second main so that you have access to whatever equipment you fetch on your next turn. That said, far more often than not, there's no reason to do anything like this. Elyv fucked around with this message at 18:35 on May 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Actually Huang was cool with it but it was a feature match and the judge there overheard it and paused the game and forced the dude to abide by the letter of the rules. "I chose to have a judge enforce the choice he made rather than proceeding with the game without calling a judge and assuming Borborygmos Enraged had been named. The judge enforced the rules without making an exception, and my opponent was not allowed to name the card he wanted. I don’t feel great about winning that way, but I don’t feel that bad either." Also, the Eternal Extravaganza 6 event where he ignored his popping of an EE on 1 to kills all his opponent's one drops but not his own one drop.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
PhyrexianLibrarian posted:Fair, but "holding your opponent to what they said in-game" is a lot different from "angle shooting based on a deckbox before the match starts." One is following the rules of the game, one is actively trying to circumvent the rules in bad faith. Sure, I didn't realize that was the comparison being made. Calling a judge over a deckbox seems like a silly thing that can be resolved without a judge, it's unreasonable to call a judge every time someone owns a specific product unless wizards wants to make a rule about which deckboxes can be used at comp REL. I guess a 2-deck deckbox would be an easy way to cheat, but still.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Actually Huang was cool with it but it was a feature match and the judge there overheard it and paused the game and forced the dude to abide by the letter of the rules. You say this like the judge forced Bob to discard his lands. What, did the judge say "hey he didn't name Borborygmos Enraged so go ahead and kill him?" Sickening posted:Both are attempting to use rules outside their intended uses. What are you even talking about? Are you really trying to argue that using the rules as written and doing what a card says is somehow... not what the rules are intended to do?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Dehtraen posted:"I chose to have a judge enforce the choice he made rather than proceeding with the game without calling a judge and assuming Borborygmos Enraged had been named. The judge enforced the rules without making an exception, and my opponent was not allowed to name the card he wanted. I don’t feel great about winning that way, but I don’t feel that bad either." Huh looks like he changed his tune, my bad. Anyways, remember when magic was cool and not lame superhero league knockoffs with boring one dimensional characters? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwIPwi_FSVc
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Speaking of artist signatures, I dug up my old playmat in a recent move. It's a shame I don't have any of the pieces from my other signature project around since selling off all my paper collection in '08 or so. I was working on getting all the pieces of the Twiddle Desire deck from PT New Orleans '03 modified by the original artists and was about halfway done when I sold out. I still wish I'd kept one of the Desires; Spencer had drawn a gigantic toilet on the card and it looked like the original art was spiraling into it.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Huh looks like he changed his tune, my bad. Posted 3 years ago posted:I know Homelands is a "bad set", but it is easily my favourite magic expansion. Drafting it is so much fun and it takes out any bullshit interactions. Who wants to guess at what this guy considers "bullshit interactions?"
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:Who wants to guess at what this guy considers "bullshit interactions?" cards better than Grey Ogre existing
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 02:10 |
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Anyways, remember when magic was cool and not lame superhero league knockoffs with boring one dimensional characters? Magic: The Gathering. Cool and good.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2017 19:37
|
|