Casting Inspiration

27 posts / 0 new
Last post
Hi,

I have a question about a player casting inspiration at competitive REL against a tapped out opponent.

Player A: "Casting inspiration"
Player B: "Well I'm tapped out, nothing counters for 0 in rtr limited"
Player A: Draws 2 cards
Player B: Wait....

What happens next?
sounds to me like player b passed on priority and looses his/her chance to add anything to the stack.

IF player a felt like being nice or foolish he could let the player b do something.  A judge would prolly get called and it would be up to them if what player b said would officially count as a passing of priority.
:For autocarding, write [ c ] card name [ / c ] You can also do [*c=lightning bolt]'Bolt[/c*] to get 'Bolt sigged because I always forget to do it
My question is not so much about priority as it is about targeting. Player A never announced targets before drawing cards. Therefore he is drawing cards illegal, grounds for a game loss I think.

Edit: My question also relates to how the game state effects rulings. A slightly different scenario

Player A: inspiration
Player B: go on
Player A: draws 2
Player B: wait... when I said 'go on' I meant choose targets, not that I was passing priority.

Inspiration would likely only be played in a limited game, where milling is often a very real option. Do these things effect judge rulings?
My question is not so much about priority as it is about targeting. Player A never announced targets before drawing cards. Therefore he is drawing cards illegal, grounds for a game loss I think.


No judge would rule that way.
It's obvious who is getting targetted, and player B cannot respond anyway. 

Sig
Disclaimers
My initial responses to rules questions are usually just answers. If you want an explanation as to why, say so. Just because it says I'm there, I'm not necessarily there. I leave my browser open so I don't have to reload ~30 tabs. Anyone who wants to text duel me through either PM or chat can just PM me with a format (and a time if playing through chat). I don't play standard.
# Card Blind Hall of Fame
3CB
3CB #1 (1/30/11): Won by silasw, with Mishra's Factory, Orzhov Basilica, Vindicate. 3CB #2 (2/13/11): Won by Vektor480, with Mishra's Workshop, Ensnaring Bridge, Scalding Tongs 3CB #3(2/20/11): Joint win between defuse, with Saprazzan Skerry, Scalding Tongs, Energy Field; and Mown, with The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Inkmoth Nexus, Sheltered Valley 3CB #4(3/13/11): Won by Mown, with Keldon Megaliths, The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Boros Garrison 3CB #5(3/20/11): Won by silasw, with Black Lotus, Channel, Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
5CB
5CB 1 (3/6/11): Won by Maraxus-of-Keld, with Tropical Island, Thallid, Nether Spirit, Daze, Foil
quotes
56819178 wrote:
So, how would I use a card that has a large in the top half and "sui?l? -- pu?? ?is?q" across the middle?
57031358 wrote:
99113151 wrote:
Winning is not important if: 1. You win by a blowout. 2. You pay billions of dollars in cards to win. If you like wasting money just to win one game, while you could have saved it to lose a few and end up winning more in the future, then it is fine by me.
what? do you ceremonially light your deck on fire after a win?
57169958 wrote:
Or did no one notice Transmogrifying Licid before. (And by not notice, I mean covered their ears and shouted LA LA LA LA )
57193048 wrote:
57169958 wrote:
Hmmm... I think the most awkward situation at the moment is simply the Myr Welder / Equipment / Licid / Aura craziness, but I'm pretty sure he's aware of it.
If the most awkward thing going on right now involves Licids, I declare victory.
56287226 wrote:
We regret to inform you of Trevor Kidd's untimely demise in an unfortunate accident involving a mysteriously blown breaker box and a photophobic creature of unknown origin at his home near Renton, Washington. We at the Wizards Community apologize for any inconvenience or delay, and assure you we'll be preparing a replacement to assume his duties as soon as we finish warming up the cloning vats.
[02:47:46] It doesn't merely "come out of suspend" - you take the last time counter off, and then suspend triggers and say "now cast that! CAST IT NOOOOOW!" [02:47:49] Because suspend has no indoors voice
[10:11:33] !opalescence [10:11:33] Opalescence {2WW} |Enchantment| Each other non-Aura enchantment is a creature with power and toughness each equal to its converted mana cost. It's still an enchantment. · Reserved,UD-R,Vin,Leg,Cla,USBC [10:11:51] *sigh* [10:12:10] Otecko: Do you have a question about Opalescence? [10:12:17] sure [10:12:23] $10 on humility interaction [10:12:25] :P [10:12:29] :D [10:12:47] humility + opalescence put into play by replenish
Ego
58325628 wrote:
Mage is awesome, BTW.
56967858 wrote:
Dear Mage24365, You are totally awesome. Thank you so much. I hope you are able to dine in Paradise without kicking the bucket to actually get there, and that every dollar you ever make magically becomes two more.
58158398 wrote:
56761258 wrote:
I don't think there are any cards like that. There are things that prevent you from activating activated abilities, things that increase their cost, and things that counter them, but I don't think anything triggers from them specifically. There are things that trigger from targeting, so that might be relevant, but I can't think of anything that triggers from targeting a player. I'm almost positive there's nothing that triggers from damage being prevented.
Rings of Brighthearth; Dormant Gomazoa; Samite Ministration.
56761258 wrote:
Well played.

 

My question is not so much about priority as it is about targeting. Player A never announced targets before drawing cards. Therefore he is drawing cards illegal, grounds for a game loss I think.


No judge would rule that way.
It's obvious who is getting targetted, and player B cannot respond anyway. 



In this case, I agree, because its clear he was passing priority. What if he had not passed priority?

I don't think its clear, as I've said, milling is a very real option in grindy limited games. The player could very well be waiting to hear who the target is before deciding to counter. Even if he has no counter, if the judge makes the decision based off that, he is giving the inspiration player an unfair knowledge of the other players hand.
While there are many pre-defined tournament shortcuts, there are also some that aren't. Judges don't like throwing out game losses left right and center - they'll do it if there's a strong reason to, like player A casting the spell and then drawing cards before B even has a chance to say he might respond - but in this case, we're talking about a spell which in 99% of cases is going to be cast targetting the controlling player. Not only does virtually every judge know this, but virtually every player does too.

If the situation played out as above - where player A gives player B a chance to respond, and B does nothing, including not verifying targets (indicating he's aware its being cast with A as the target), I'd be satisfied that both players were aware that A was the target.

As usual, I must point out that most of my judging experience involves straightforward matters unlike this, but I'd be surprised if this was not a valid outcome.
I'm all about super-control in MTG. If you're able to stop my shenanigans, then there aren't enough shenanigans. Lv 1 Judge Current Decklists Sweeping Beauty (Casual) A Vision of Clones (Casual) Coming soon... more decks! :-O
Seems reasonable, what confuses me is how much a judge takes board state into account when making rulings, i.e. what if both players have 3 cards in library, etc.
I don't think its clear, as I've said, milling is a very real option in grindy limited games. The player could very well be waiting to hear who the target is before deciding to counter


Every player who has played Magic for more than a month knows that you so rarely cast a targetted card draw spell targetting another player that you explicitly announce it if you do. Therefore, no announcement = targetting self. Even with mill available, it still follows.

If player A hadn't passed priority and had just drawn the cards, that's different. He's drawing extra cards when he shouldn't as the spell hasn't resolved yet. I think that'd be a game loss even if player B couldn't respond, but I'd ask a second opinion from a more experienced judge. ^^ 
I'm all about super-control in MTG. If you're able to stop my shenanigans, then there aren't enough shenanigans. Lv 1 Judge Current Decklists Sweeping Beauty (Casual) A Vision of Clones (Casual) Coming soon... more decks! :-O
Seems reasonable, what confuses me is how much a judge takes board state into account when making rulings, i.e. what if both players have 3 cards in library, etc.


That's why a lot of these hypotheticals all really depend on the situation. However, as a rule of thumb, we (players and judges) are going to assume Inspiration is cast targetting the controlling player unless they've explicitly said otherwise, because under normal circumstances we'd think most players would expect the target to be the controlling player, and would say otherwise if they didn't think so.

Ask yourself - have you ever seen someone cast Inspiration targetting another player and not actually say it was targetting the other player?
I'm all about super-control in MTG. If you're able to stop my shenanigans, then there aren't enough shenanigans. Lv 1 Judge Current Decklists Sweeping Beauty (Casual) A Vision of Clones (Casual) Coming soon... more decks! :-O
Basically, your philosophy seems to be simple: use common sense.

That seems like a pretty reasonable judging philosophy. My confusion was regarding where a spell has multiple options, but one is used 99% of the time, if no targets are declared, if its simply assumed your opponent used the 'optimal' mode. You seem to affirm this. Also, if a player casts a lava spike, but never target, are they considered to be actually casting a spell. Basically, I was claiming that if targets werent declared after a reasonable period of time, you should ask about it, or assume the spell was not yet cast. Your response appears to indicate if the spell has a '99% of the time' mode, then its alright to omit targets, as they are understood.

This situation is not so clear cut as it might first seem. It caused a ton of confusion with cards like cavern of souls, which caused a rare rules philosophy change regarding one specific card. Basically, the question was whether you could counter a spell cast using cavern if they didnt state they were using cavern.

In the end, they changed the rules to make it assume the player is using the uncounterable clause unless otherwise stated. This fits with the common sense philosophy you have, but caused a lot of internal rules discussion from what I read.

If both players are at 2 and player A casts sign in blood without declaring a target, and waits to see if there is a response. Player B waits a reasonable period of time (say 4-5 seconds), and then says "resolves". Player B then says "you go to 0".

If player B understands that targets had not been declared, is he obligated to point that out? In his perspective, he is waiting for targets to be declared. After a reasonable time has passed it becomes clear that it is actually player A has cast sign with the 'obvious' self target, and so player B can say resolves and win. Once he says 'you go to 0' its difficult to back up the game state, as its quite reasonable to think that player A hadnt realized he was going to die until player B pointed it out. At the same time, perhaps player A thought the obvious mode here was to finish off his opponent.

Due to the overall complexity of magic, evaluating the situation based on the game-state, while it seems to have many upsides, also appears to have some pitfalls. I guess there is simply no fool proof way to do things though
If player B understands that targets had not been declared, is he obligated to point that out?


He is obligated not to make that decision for the other player.

No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.

This thread, and your other thread on the Chandra's Fury reminded me of a sitation I saw in the Modern portion of Pro Tour Return to Ravnica.  Unfortunately, I forgot the names of the players, but one of them was a brit.  We'll call him player A and his opponent Player B.  The situation was as follows:

Player A: Cast Kitchen Finks
Player B: Cast a counter spell that draws a card (can't remember the name, perhaps it was Cryptic Command it was Remand)
Player A: Without saying a word taps for , momentarily reveals Mana Leak then snaps it back quickly as he realises his opponent has 3 untapped lands.
Plyaer B: Called for a judge and says "He tapped the lands and I saw the spell"
Player A: Agrees with the series of events

The judges ruling was that the spell was cast.  Player A wanted to then target his own Kitchen Finks, but the judge said that as no targets were announced, it was assumed to be the top object on the stack.  Obviously, this is not exactly the same situation as either of your scenarios, but I think it gives an indication of how judges might rule given certain calls to make.  There must be many more sitations on coverage and I'm sure if you watch regularly you will be able to build up a picture of the Pro scene and how things go down.

Cheers
LoveMonkey: Appreciate you posting actual judge calls. Very helpful to see their reasoning. This seems to support the 'when their is targeting confusion, assume most likely scenario'.
Lovemonkey: Where did you read/see that?  Is it a 'report' or live coverage or...??

I watched the match on youtube so I actually saw it happen.  I will see if I can find the video again and post a link here.

Cheers

EDIT: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud1AdB5u9Tw

Skip to 1:50:55 for the start of the game or 1:53:40 for the judges call.  He left it revealed for a little longer than I remembered, but the situation is pretty much as I described.
No worries.  I am not that concerned with that specific match, just wondered where to see things like that.  Was it on some 'official' channel, or were you just looking for any MTG games?
I just play these videos sometimes whilst I'm working and listen to the commentary.  If something interesting happens I wind it back and see what was going on.  It's from the Wizards youtube channel.

Cheers
The judges ruling was that the spell was cast.  Player A wanted to then target his own Kitchen Finks, but the judge said that as no targets were announced, it was assumed to be the top object on the stack.  Obviously, this is not exactly the same situation as either of your scenarios, but I think it gives an indication of how judges might rule given certain calls to make.  There must be many more situations on coverage and I'm sure if you watch regularly you will be able to build up a picture of the Pro scene and how things go down.


It is worthy of note that this is a assumed shortcut that is specifically outlined in the rules.
4.2 Tournament Shortcuts
[...]
Certain conventional tournament shortcuts used in Magic are detailed below. If a player wishes to deviate from these, he or she should be explicit about doing so.
[...] 
• A player who casts a spell or activates an ability that targets an object on the stack is assumed to target the legal target closest to the top of the stack unless the player specifies otherwise.



MJWhitfield1 thanks for pointing that out
  It's from the Wizards youtube channel.

Cheers




Cool, thanks

This reminds me of an Esper Charm story I heard once.


Player A: Cast Esper Charm

Player B: "Targeting who?"

Player A: "Myself"

Player B: "Judge!"


Esper Charm player intended to draw two cards but the only mode that targets is discard two. As I recall the story it was ruled that Player A cast the discard mode on himself.
These stories remind of why it is I try to never use shortcuts and do everything very formally when I play Magic.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.

It is worthy of note that this is a assumed shortcut that is specifically outlined in the rules.
4.2 Tournament Shortcuts
[...]
Certain conventional tournament shortcuts used in Magic are detailed below. If a player wishes to deviate from these, he or she should be explicit about doing so.
[...] 
• A player who casts a spell or activates an ability that targets an object on the stack is assumed to target the legal target closest to the top of the stack unless the player specifies otherwise.




Yea, that's a good point and should be noted.  I am not familiar with tournament rules and didn't know that was actually written down.  What I was also thinking about was the fact that he hadn't technically finished casting the spell when he realised he didn't want to cast it, but it had still been considered cast.

Cheers
This reminds me of an Esper Charm story I heard once.


Player A: Cast Esper Charm

Player B: "Targeting who?"

Player A: "Myself"

Player B: "Judge!"


Esper Charm player intended to draw two cards but the only mode that targets is discard two. As I recall the story it was ruled that Player A cast the discard mode on himself.



It would be a really tough call, whether I would punch Player B or the judge first. 
I cannot decide if that esper charm play is awesome or pure evil

I cannot decide if that esper charm play is awesome or pure evil

Edit: The 'pure evil' play is if you call the judge after he draws the cards. That seems really slimy but if he doesnt wait to draw you might not be able to stop him in time. This effectively gives the charm a 4th mode 'lose the game'



I assume you at least have to tell your opponent "Then you discard" with an immense grin. If the sequence goes "Targeting who?" "Myself" and then he draws two immediatly, he's wrong because you never passed priority anyway. If you do pass priority without saying anything and he draws, a judge could very well rule that you let him draw cards when you had plenty of time to stop him, and I'm pretty sure that since it's intentionnal, that would be Cheating.

That is still an awesome trick :-p 

Rules Advisor

Quotes
76783093 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
58331438 wrote:
56945988 wrote:
Rancor dies to in-response removal.
Yeah... Until next game, where it'll be right back. Seriously, there's no way to deal with Rancor in any format. It should be banned, except Gleemax is a lobbyist for the Rancor party, so that'll never happen.
You can't ban rancor, it just returns to your deck.
58331438 wrote:
57461258 wrote:
You might want to actually talk to the Flavor & Storyline Board people... since, you know, our whole reason for playing Magic is the flavor. I'm willing to bet you'll get a lot more interest there than in General.
Indeed, both posters down there would be thrilled.
57817638 wrote:
I think I wasn't direct enough in my last post. I'll try to fix it now. Ahem... NO ONE CARES there you have it.
57471038 wrote:
When talks about banning Jace first started, I was thinking that I would see him banned come June 20th. But as I think more about it, I don't really think that Jace is the problem anymore. Sure his power level leaves very little to the imagination (opening Jace is like opening a refrigerator box with a naked girl on the inside), and sure his price does have a strong impact on what players choose to play (playing Jace is like being intimate with a woman and she doesn't charge you in the morning), but it is not the source of all the problems in Standard.
76973988 wrote:
How do people think saving room to print more abilities on cards is dumbing down the game?

Do you really think, say, Akroma would ever be printed if she said, "Akroma can block by creatures with this ability and cannot be blocked by creatures without this ability.  If a creature without this ability would deal combat damage by Akroma would be destroyed, prevent all combat damage that creature would deal to Akroma this combat.  Attacking does not cause Akroma to tap.  If Akroma is blocked and deals lethal damage, it deals the remainder of its damage to the defending player.  Akroma may attack and use abilities that require tapping in the casting cost the turn it enters the battlefield.  Akroma cannot be damaged, enchanted, equipped, blocked or targeted by black or red sources" rather than her "dumbed down" wording she has?  No freaking way.  Keywording and shorthand allows them to make complicated cards easy to play with, allowing them to be printed in the first place.
57817638 wrote:
The creation of praetors was worth it just because now amoeboid changeling is a praetor.
57140668 wrote:
1. cast frankie peanuts2. ask opponent "will you concede the game this turn"? if they say yes, you win; if they say no, play a staying power
3. subsequently ask "will you attack this turn"? and "will you cast a spell this turn"? (using a Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir for the second question if necessary) to ensure they can't disrupt the combo
4. donate them a platinum angel
5. play a mox lotus and braingeyser them for every card in their library. play an opalescence and donate them a glorious anthem and a blacker lotus, then play enchanted evening. play and activate a mindslaver and then donate them a fastbond and the mox lotus (returning one of the donates to your hand with eternal witness or whatever)
6. during their turn, play every permanent in their hand (playing lands with fastbond) then (as yourself) cast mirrorweave on the blacker lotus, so every permanent becomes a copy of it. proceed to tear up every card they control, and hopefully do it before they notice that they aren't bound by staying power's ability anymore and can concede
82423538 wrote:
57471038 wrote:
82423538 wrote:
One part of the statement being true=/=the whole statement true.
Whatever. I'm still here about ten minutes away. Whenever you want to get destroyed in Magic, I'm available.
I would like to get destroyed in Magic, actually. Do you know anybody good enough?
57617478 wrote:
Please format your statements in a way that doesn't look like a baboon hit its face on your keyboard.
57140668 wrote:
why did Garruk Relentless lose a loyalty counter
Show
to get to the other side
89522235 wrote:
You're such an obvious troll that you have hexproof and : Regenerate.
56957928 wrote:
56776038 wrote:
Dark Ritual being overpowered is determined more by what is done with it than the card itself.
True, but the fact that it enables so many ridiculous things is pretty telling. It's like, sure I can use a shotgun as a bludgeoning instrument, but that doesn't make it not a shotgun.
79035425 wrote:
Shortly before Serra died, she transferred her spark into an angel whose full name was Asha Avacyn Bolas. Her dragon father groomed her for her positions in Alara and Innistrad, and she's also been getting help from her uncle Ugin in the form of Urza, who was resurrected as Marit Lage to be the avatar as which she projects herself into material realms. Grieslbrand is a split personality who sometimes wanders the planes disguised as a human woman named Liliana Vess.
97610188 wrote:
Yeah that (Content Removed) really annoys me. Moderated by MY_self right about naahowwww!
93446159 wrote:
Dilleux_Lepaire just won the thread.
57461258 wrote:
And, as usual, Dilleux wins the entire thread. Nice work, sir, nice work.
99113151 wrote:
They need to make 9 layers of zones where cards go when they "die". Much like Hell.
56778328 wrote:
Wow, holy doggy poop, kids, obvious statement is obvious.
56776038 wrote:
122053101 wrote:
i don't think your geting it WotC is trying to kill the comption to make it so that there shity app is the only one left.
I haven't tried the app. How is its use of English grammar? Cheers!
57471038 wrote:
Everyone's life would be easier if players would, instead of coming to the 'net for help with a deck, just netdeck and be done with it. And I'm not talking about some Top 8 lists, for the Casualists, too, can benefit from netdecking. I've netdecked plenty of decks from the Casual Play forums from users such as Mown, Raedien, Floopfoot, and a few others. I snatched straight the heck out of my web browser. Yes, people, your original idea fell victim to a savage netdecker. You have been assimiliated. Suppose I wanted a Zombie deck. Why on earth would I spend time searching Gatherer for a decent list of Zombie cards when Raedien already did it for me? Taking time to be creative or waiting on people on the forums to tell you why your deck sucks or 'go to Casual forums' is a disasterous waste of time (to me).
56957928 wrote:
82423538 wrote:
If WotC started putting $100 bills in packs, the players would complain that they folded them wrong.
No, they just spam them with ban requests. That being said, Magic was ruined back in Alpha when they added all that rules and cards [Debutantes avert your eyes]. My friends and I still like playing it the "pure" way (Basically we go into the woods and hit eachother with wiffle bats while shouting made up obscenities. You know, the way Garfield wanted it to be played).
56957928 wrote:
Don't worry about it. I've come up with a list of changes to fix EDH. -First off, there's no commander. -The minimum deck size is 60 cards, and each deck can have up to four of each card, save basic lands and relentless rats. Also decks have no color identity. -Starting life total is 20. And voila, now things are balanced.
89522235 wrote:
Here's a clever play you can try yourself: -Convince friend to run relentless rats.dec in legacy tournament -Get a deck with lots of mill, yixlid jailer, and humility -Drop humility and jailer, wait for him to dump his hand, mill him out -All his rats now have no abilities. Call a judge because he's playing an illegal deck with more than 4 of a single card. -Get him/her banned from competitive magic play
142055101 wrote:
But how to mark them without making the individual sleeve different! You could buy a skunk and slam it's butt on you deck (pardon the french) Then after the game just sniff at your opponent's pile of cards and you will know if any of your cards are there!!!
141434757 wrote:
In Soviet Russia, Sorin opens You
71235715 wrote:
L, is for the leather gloves you weaaaar. O, is for the organs that guy could spaaaare. V, is very very, extraordinay. E, is for every vagrant i butchered in a wine cellar befooooore.
57052258 wrote:
The outer layer of the Magic: the Gathering box, the carton, or crust, is fairly thin and light, and contains largely aluminosilcates. Within that lies the middle layer, consisting of the familiar booster pack. Although solid, the booster packs' high temperatures allow them to acutally move around within the booster box. This flow, sometimes called convection, is cited by frustrated box mappers as one of WOTC's most genious uses of thermodynamics since the Ravnica block. No one knows what lies at the core of the booster box, but scientists theorize that it must be especially dense in order to make up for the large amount of fluff distributed amongst the booster packs.
58232598 wrote:
88993869 wrote:
Torpor Orb is absolutely godawful against Vexing Devil.
whoever is playing vexing devil is probably losing anyways
56957928 wrote:
I imagine [Ajani 3's] second ability involves him hurling the creature at your opponent Brion Stoutarm style, then the guy is just like "Okay, that may have worked, but don't- GOD DAMN IT!" as he does it again because cats don't give a **** :33.
56957928 wrote:
"Do or do not, there is no try." - Albus Dumbledore, The Lord of the Rings.
89522235 wrote:
68978039 wrote:
Its like that one time Elves broke out in a field of Jund. Elves became a resurgent hit, then died off again once Jund adapted to the rest of the field of G/W that it required mass removal that inherently pooped on Elves too. Submit to the menace. Delver can, and will blot out the sun.
Then we shall play in the shade.
89522235 wrote:
I'm sorry, this forum isn't for getting bad advice on mediocre decks, that's standard deck help. This forum is for starting ****storms.
97820278 wrote:
139359831 wrote:
Your advice would only lead me to make generic, boring, and unworthy content. It's of no use to me.
I just got this image of you as an architect, having finished a building suspended by only a small pole in its southwest corner, saying it's original. Then the building collapses.
56957928 wrote:
I for one love the flavor of legendary lands. "I remember my days as a youth at Tolarian Academy." "Wow, small multiverse, I actually went there too." "WAIT, DON'T- Well ****, there's $200,000 in student loans well spent."
56957928 wrote:
And flavor goes out the window when you cast a second copy of a planeswalker right after the first one dies, so... "Hey Nissa, I need a favor." "You just asked me for a 'favor' like thirty seconds ago, and it turned out to be having Sarkhan Transmogrify my only follower into a dragon like 5 times -which dickery aside also violates some laws of causality - and then you let me get beaten over the head by that hedron crab." "...I'll give you " "...Well all right then."
57150868 wrote:
GM, I don't think Dill is better than you. I KNOW it. Even if he wakes up every morning, clubs a baby seal, steals all the TV remotes from within a block's radius of his house and then robs hungry orphans of their food he'd be better than you, for the simple reason that he learns from his mistakes.
143211137 wrote:
57033358 wrote:
Tamiyo vs. Gideon
What would they have to fight about? Like, all I can think of now is Gideon going "Hey, long-ears! I'm gathering a group of 'Walkers together to fight some tentacle monsters.....you want in?" and Tamiyo going "Ew! Hentai no bakka Gideon-desu desu!" and flying away.
76783093 wrote:
I open 4 packs just to be on the safe side. Not only do I get more cards than everyone else, but I also get to spend the rest of the night off. Win Win.
191752181 wrote:
MaRo has a thing for people opening boosters with bad cards. But since he can only get so many bad cards printed in each set, he has found a devious way of getting more bad cards into circulation: He makes entire print sheets with just bad rares, then puts them onto the assembly line. He proceeds to wring his hands and twirl his evil mustache that he grew for twirling purposes as a lightning bolt strikes in the background. Afterwards, he goes to make sure that the good cards are only opened by everyone's friends, and that we all only get to open bad cards. He does this by memorising each booster, than switching them around accordingly. Whenever someone complains about a card, he immediately jumps out from behind a chair to yell "WELL, IT'S NOT FOR YOU!" before merging back into the shadows in order to devise new ways in which he can screw over players, then claim that he has valid reasons for doing so.
97820278 wrote:
192729031 wrote:
You open a booster pack, and staring back at you from the rare slot is a Lotleth Troll? At least I can stick him in my EDH deck and still have four for my standard constructed.
Because lol troll
56874518 wrote:
It helped that I more or less skipped most of GM_Champion's longer diatribes. I only have so many brain cells I'm willing to sacrifice each day.
192931349 wrote:
Mark Rosewater is sitting in a seemingly innocuous cable TV van, outside of Bankaimastery's house. Sitting nearby are two hardened criminal hackers, fresh out of prison, and filled with resentment at their lack of physical fitness. "Have you managed to hack his brainwaves yet? The set deadline's coming up fast." "We're almost through. It should be coming up on the screen any second." The hacker presses a button, and Kevin's thoughts flash onto the screen. Mark and the hackers stare in amazement at the sheer beauty, the elegance, and the raw truth of what they see. It's like the ending to 2001: A Space Odyssey. Brilliant light shines across the screen, the truth of existence is made clear to them, and they despair at their own foolishness, their own ignorance, their own inadequacy. And then they steal his ideas. As they return back to R&D, Mark sneers at a haggard old man chained to a cast-iron sphere. The man looks up from his laborious task of breaking rocks in the dungeon of Wizards of the Coast headquarters, and asks a question: "Kevin, my greatest student. He - he's all right, isn't he? You didn't hurt him?" Mark deals him a weighty blow with his boot. "Know your place, Richard. Get back to work."
57023768 wrote:
Now show me on the Garruk doll where Zac Hill ruined your enjoyment of Magic...
63711769 wrote:
I'm only opposed to it because it bears so little relation to how people actually play the game. The example of Miracles is actually a much better one then the Clone example I was trying to use. From the game's perspective, the card can move instantly from face down in the library to revealed in the hand and that's fine for the rules. But in real life, we can't actually do that, so the card spends a good bit of time in locations that are neither where that player's library is nor where that player's hand is. And that's fine for real life. What I don't want is the disconnect to be explicitly codified. Along the lines of
183664.697 A game of Magic as laid out by these rules exists only as a pure Platonic ideal, utterly unrealizable by fallible mortals limited by the confines of physicality and the ravages of evil and sin. 183664.698 The cake is a lie, too.
I know it's true, but I don't want the rules to actually straight-up tell me that.
147137503 wrote:
77120821 wrote:
Pfft this cant be serious can it? If it is please delete your account OP. Its not even close to ban worthy, considering what JTMS and stoneforge had to accomplish to get banned i see the WotC selling magic to aquire Pokemon before that ever happens.
I'm trying to imagine sorin markov as a gym leader in one of those pokemon games which you have to beat him to get his badge... somehow I imagine that he would stab you in the chest with his sword before giving you the badge, even if you beat his pokemon....
196239043 wrote:
Personally, I'd be fine with tea time but then I'm not gonna waste the mana summoning Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. He always takes all the sugar, drinks the whole pot of Earl Grey and doesn't even say thank you. SO. RUDE.

 

JustTerrorIt wrote:

 

JuliusPringle wrote:

All I want to do is sit down and play magic, but when I walked in yesterday, (since I didn't talk to anyone) nobody talked to me and I silently bought what I wanted and walked out.


If you don't talk to anyone, that increases the odds that no one will talk to you.

 

JuliusPringle wrote:

So how do I just... introduce myself? "Hi, my name is Adam, wanna play magic with me?" Do I go to the counter and talk to the cashier?


Yeah. Talk to the cashier. Tell him/her that you want a Black Lotus, and if they don't have one tell them that the store isn't on par with what you expected.

 

Reach into your back left pocket. Pull out a deck list that you copied directly from some ChannelFireball top 8 Standard discussion, and ask for all the cards, as is, on that list. Then, ask for some random, probably terrible cards from whatever set is Standard legal. Say it's tech for the upcoming changes in the metagame.

 

Pull out a deck, and tell some random dude you wanna test (you have to use the term "test" for this to work) for Standard. Make sure that deck contains Kitchen Finks and Alluring Siren. Maybe throw in Nyxathid for good measure.

 

Finally, before you leave, spill (make it look like an accident) one hundred singleton, random cards onto the floor. Pick them up, put them in a pile, and say "EEE-DEE-AYCH".

 

I know this sounds dumb at first, but it will work. With the method outlined above, you will draw the attention of players that play older formats by asking for cards that no one on Earth can reasonably afford. You will get the attention of the wanna-be pro, Stomp-n00bz players by pulling out a well known decklist and declare that you have "tech" to make it better. You will get the attention of all the kind, helpful players by seemingly not knowing the most common format by having non-Standard legal cards in a deck that you claim is Standard legal. Finally, you catch all the rest of the Magic players by saying "EEE-DEE-AYCH" (EDH (or Commander)).

And there you have it. You will be talking to more people than you would have wanted to talk to in no time.

 

Smoke_Stack wrote:

EDH is the best format anyway


See, it's starting already.

 

Break the Card
What is Break the Card?
Break the Card is a regular thread in the Cards and Combo Forum. Quite simply, the participants are given a Johnnystatic card (e.g. Xenograft) and are asked to build a deck around it. The winner and honorable mentions are sigged below. Get brewing!
Week 1 : Xenograft
This week's Break the Card was based around Xenograft. Thread : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27681049/Break_the_card_:_Xenograft?pg=1 Winner : Axterix with his Vampdrazi deck. Finalist : Vektor480 with his Ally/Golem/Plant deck. Honorable mentions : Zammm for the Turntimber Ranger combo and TinGorilla for suggesting Sarkhan the Mad.
Week 2 : Mindlock Orb
Here's the link to the Mindlock Orb contest : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27697565/Break_the_Card_:_Mindlock_Orb?sdb=1&pg=last#497536269 Winner : Axterix with his Maralen of the Mornsong deck. Honorable mentions : Void_Elemental.
Week 3 : Bludgeon Brawl
Here's the link to Break the Card : Bludgeon Brawl : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27715169/Break_the_Card_:_Bludgeon_Brawl?sdb=1&pg=last#498208797 Winner : Vektor and his Grab the World deck. Finalist : Crandor with his Awesome Aliteration deck. Honorable mentions : RP Jesus with his Wat deck and Zix200 with his Signet Renewal deck.
Week 4 : Followed Footsteps
This week was Followed Footsteps : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27748677/Break_the_Card_:_Followed_Footsteps?pg=1 Winner : Tevish_Szat with his Exponential Growth deck. Honorable mentions : Zix with his Carbon Copies deck and Escef with his Fungus of Speed and Time deck.
Week 5 : Delaying Shield
This week's card was Delaying Shield : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27790101/Break_the_Card_:_Delaying_Shield Winner : Tevish_Szat. Finalist : Vampire_Bat. Honorable Mention : Zix200.
Week 6 : Painter's Servant
This week's card was Painter's Servant : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27940861/Break_the_Card_:_Painters_Servant?pg=1 Winner : Tevish_Szat with his Paint it Black deck. Finalist : Wprundv with his Tiger, Tiger Painted Bright deck.
Week 7 : Venser, the Sojourner
This week's card was Venser, the Sojourner : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/27977489/Break_the_Card_:_Venser,_the_Sojourner Winner : Izzett with her "Venser, Trickster Trader" deck. Finalist : Wprundv with his "Tactical Sojourner Action" deck.
Week 8 : Personal Sanctuary
This week's card was Personal Sanctuary : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28005461/Break_the_card_:_Personal_Sanctuary Winner : MrQuizzles. Honorable mention : Vampire_Bat and UbberSheep
Week 9 : Sundial of the Infinite
This week's card was Sundial of the Infinite : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28038277/Break_the_card_:_Sundial_of_the_Infinite Finalist : Izzett with her "Afterlife Trespassers" deck. Winner : Xeromus with his "Fortune 500" deck.
Week 10 : Jace's Archivist
This week's card was Jace's Archivist : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28063377/Break_the_Card_:_Jaces_Archivist. Finalists : Jentaru with his "Consecration of the Draw" deck and HereticSmitty with his "ADHD: The deck" deck. Winner : JaxsonBateman with his "The Archives Are Endless!" deck.
Week 11 : Search the City
This week's card was Search the City : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29518555/Break_the_Card_:_Search_the_City Finalist : Mown with "A Thousand Footsteps". Winner : Desolation_masticore with "Burn the City".
Week 12 : Fiend Hunter
This week's card was Fiend Hunter : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29530975/Break_the_Card_:_Fiend_Hunter Winner : Yuyu63 with "Carnival Hunting". Honorable mention : Dknowle's "Champion the Fiend".
Week 13 : Clock of Omens
This week's card was Clock of Omens : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29541549/Break_the_Card_:_Clock_of_Omens?pg=1 Winner : Dknowle's "The Myrs Go Marching".
Week 14 : Light of Sanction
This week's card was Light of Sanction : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29607219/Break_the_Card_:_Light_of_Sanction?pg=1 Winner : Zauzich's "Divine Plague".
Week 15 : Assemble the Legion
This week's card was Assemble the Legion : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29662307/Break_the_Card_:_Assemble_the_Legion Winner : JBTM's "Some Assembly Required".
Week 16 : High Tide
This week's cards were High Tide and/or Bubbling Muck : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29760427/Break_the_Card_:_High_Tide Winner : Mown's "Puppet Strings".
Week 17 : Illusionist's Bracers
This week's card was Illusionist's Bracers : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29776943/Break_the_Card_:_Illusionistss_Bracers Winner : Enigma256's "Tezzeret's Bracers"
Week 18 : Savor the Moment
This week's card was Savor the Moment : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29787235/Break_the_Card_:_Savor_the_Moment Winner : POSValkir's "A Savory Filibuster!"
Week 19 : Grinning Ignus
This week's card was Grinning Ignus : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29795547/Break_the_Card_:_Grinning_Ignus Winner : dknowle's "Luren' and Laughin'".
Week 20 : Transcendence
This week's card was Transcendence : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29806481/Break_the_Card_:_Transcendence Winners : Mown's "Transcending Timing Restrictions" and Dknowle's "Blinded by Greed", tied for the win.
Week 21 : Mortus Strider
This week's card was Mortus Strider : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29818471/Break_the_Card_:_Mortus_Strider Winner : SimonGlume's "Mortus Head".
Week 22 : High Priest of Penance
This week's card was High Priest of Penance : http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29917231/Break_the_Card_High_Priest_of_Penance Winners : JBTM's "Two Clerics and a Goblin walk into a (Bom)bar(dment)..." and POSValkir1's "Choke Their Rivers with Our Dead!".
Week 23 : False Cure
This week's card was False Cure :http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29964239/Break_the_Card_:_False_Cure Winner : Dknowle's "When Hippos Fly".

Week 24 : Akroan Horse

This week's card was Akroan Horse : http://community.wizards.com/forum/cards-and-combos/threads/4024821.

Winner : Dknowle's "Indian Giver".

Week 25 : Leylines

This week saw multiple cards being in the contest : all of the Leylines! http://community.wizards.com/forum/cards-and-combos/threads/4067621

Winner : POSValkir1's "Laying the Battle Lines".

I read up about this 'trick' and it turns out to most likely be illegal, so don't try it (well, its perfectly fine to try, your opponent does something confusing, and you call a judge and let the judge sort it out). However, I believe the correct judge ruling is draw 2 but get a warning for the player who was unclear with his modes.

Also, baiting your opponent 'targeting who' could get you DQ'ed for unsporting conduct

EDIT: Is the judging philosophy "ruling by intent" still how things are done?

www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.a...

I was looking for articles on philosophy to better understand the line between holding your opponent to good technical play and unsporting conduct and this seems a good explanation, although written in 2004

The article goes over baiting your opponent into rules violations with queries such as 'targeting who?', if you know perfectly well exactly what is going on (the baiting player is in big trouble in this case)
Sign In to post comments