6/22/2010 SF: "Judging Any"

12 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's Serious Fun, which goes live Tuesday morning on magicthegathering.com.
Yeah, I'm a casual player and have played with a few different groups.

The worst for me is when a majority of the group takes all shortcuts and plays real loose on the rules. Also, I have played with more than one player who insists that the text on the card trumps the rules, and so they don't play using the oracle text, but rather the poorly worded original text on several much older cards. An example being that one of my permanents has "can't be the target of..." and they say that their card doesn't say target, so it's not targeting it, just doing damage to it. O.o 
Because my play group has dissolved to zero, the only time I get to play is with people I teach.  I find that they frown on using "the stack" to one's advantage, and not allowing one to take back their mistakes.  As a consequence I've learned to just let certain opportunities fly by, and let them take back what they need to so long as it isn't so dramatic a take back as to end the game.  I get the distinct feeling that if I ever play in a tournament again my rules instinct will be so dulled that I'm going to be destroyed.  But hey, at least this way I have two people I can play with.  Better that than letting my cards gather dust.
I only have one other person to play with, so we are really relaxed on the rules.  If I catch that my buddy didnt untap his lands and stuff or I do, we say something.  If all you are doing is looking for a land with say ramapant growth and thats all your doing that turn we just go ahead with our turn.  The first few we arent usually doing much anyway.  We dont play much anymore either.  We got bored with the cards we have, and I mostly play online anyway.  I went to one FNM and it was a little difficult remembering the tournament way of playing.  I kept repeating to myself, untap upkeep draw main combat main end lol. 

On the other hand, I want Kelly back as a writer and someone else as an editor.
Start adding in multiple players and you get questions like "If I kill  the player controlling an Oblivion Ring that has exiled my creature do I get that creature back when  he or she leaves the game?" complicating things that were pretty simple  otherwise. (The answer is "No," by the way.)


I was very sure the opposite is true.

But I agree with the message to play closer to real Magic. I have a friend who does the dumb 20/20/20 thing, but then allows everyone in the game one free mulligan. The reason his opening hands don't contain enough land is because he's not playing enough land.

EDIT: Ahahahaha! I figured out why Oblivion Ring works that way. It took a minute. I kind of don't want to spoil it now since it was fun figuring out why on my own.
Start adding in multiple players and you get questions like "If I kill  the player controlling an Oblivion Ring that has exiled my creature do I get that creature back when  he or she leaves the game?" complicating things that were pretty simple  otherwise. (The answer is "No," by the way.)



I was very sure the opposite is true.




Me, too. When a player leaves the game, all permanents controlled by him or her do so as well, so in my opinion, the "return that permanent to the battlefield" trigger on Oblivion Ring should trigger....

Unless the CR specifically state that no triggered abilities from permanents controlled by the leaving player will trigger?

Sheesh, now I'm gonna have to go and look that up.

EDIT: Rule 800.4a states, in part, about a player that is leaving the game: "all spells and abilities controlled by that player on the stack cease to exist". Therefore, the trigger from Oblivion Ring never resolves, and the permanents are never returned.
Sorry - I'm still stuck on the Oblivion Ring thing.  If it's still on the stack when the caster dies then it hasn't "entered the battlefield" and it hasn't exiled anything yet, so that can't be it.

Surely when the controller dies with the Ring on the battlefield then it will "leave the battlefield" and the exiled permament will return?
Sorry - I'm still stuck on the Oblivion Ring thing.  If it's still on the stack when the caster dies then it hasn't "entered the battlefield" and it hasn't exiled anything yet, so that can't be it.

Surely when the controller dies with the Ring on the battlefield then it will "leave the battlefield" and the exiled permament will return?



If the ring hasn't exiled anything yet, when the caster dies the triggered ability that would will disappear from the stack and nothing will happen. However, if the ring's "remove" trigger has already resolved, and the targeted permanent is exiled, when the ring's controller dies there will be no return trigger, because of rule 800.4a

I'm not looking forward to explaining this to my regular playgroup.....

The group of people I play Magic with are all friends outside the game, and we play at each others' apartments. This creates a situation where I don't have to deal with a lot of cheating: we have the mutual respect not to cheat each other, and if someone was pulling something sketchy, it's easy to just not invite him/her back to your residence.

But we make mistakes a-plenty! If it's a quick fix, we allow takebacks. If there's a mistake that would require serious headaches to amend, we let it go for the sake of time. We all know we're not trying to swindle one another, and we're all out for the general experience of the game, not seeing the rules are properly applied down to the last subscetion of every rule. I just want to keep the game moving, and have faith that everyone is out to enjoy the evening and the company.

Sorry - I'm still stuck on the Oblivion Ring thing.  If it's still on the stack when the caster dies then it hasn't "entered the battlefield" and it hasn't exiled anything yet, so that can't be it.

Surely when the controller dies with the Ring on the battlefield then it will "leave the battlefield" and the exiled permament will return?




If the ring hasn't exiled anything yet, when the caster dies the triggered ability that would will disappear from the stack and nothing will happen. However, if the ring's "remove" trigger has already resolved, and the targeted permanent is exiled, when the ring's controller dies there will be no return trigger, because of rule 800.4a

I'm not looking forward to explaining this to my regular playgroup.....



Actually, it's 800.4c, which states that "If a triggered ability that would be controlled by a player who has left the game would be put onto the stack, it isn't put on the stack."

Since the "return to the battlefield" effect is a triggered ability, it is not put onto the stack.

This changes, however, if you interpret rule 800.4a to mean that the leaving the game causes three things to happen sequentially, and that even if there are no spells on the stack or change of control effects the game still checks for them. 
"We will all be purified in Wurm. What is good will be used to heal Wurm, or grow Wurm, or to fuel Wurm's path. What is vile will be extruded, and we will be free of it forever." --Prophet of the Cult of Wurm
This changes, however, if you interpret rule 800.4a to mean that the leaving the game causes three things to happen sequentially, and that even if there are no spells on the stack or change of control effects the game still checks for them. 



Only if you assume that players would get priority between the three things happening, and that all three have to all happen before 800.4c can apply - the leaves play trigger from Oblivion Ring only gets put on the stack when a player would get priority, and no state based actions are pending, so you'd have to have players getting priority after all spells/abilities controlled by that player cease to exist, but before that player counts as having left the game for 800.4c to stop new abilities from making it to the stack...

It would be neat and intuitively obvious for killing Oblivion Ring's owner to return the removed card to play, but it's neater from a rules/logistics perspective to not let anything trigger from a card, the only copy of which could be in its owner's pocket miles away and no longer to hand to check the exact wording - sure, with OR, people usually know what it does, but you can't expect players to remember exactly what every leaves play trigger on every card that's no longer around actually does, particularly if there's a significant interruption to play, or complicated things happening in the game before the triggers take effect...
M:tG Rules Advisor

It would be neat and intuitively obvious for killing Oblivion Ring's owner to return the removed card to play, but it's neater from a rules/logistics perspective to not let anything trigger from a card, the only copy of which could be in its owner's pocket miles away and no longer to hand to check the exact wording - sure, with OR, people usually know what it does, but you can't expect players to remember exactly what every leaves play trigger on every card that's no longer around actually does, particularly if there's a significant interruption to play, or complicated things happening in the game before the triggers take effect...



Agreed.  It would also leave open the possibility of a player's losing the game resulting in her or him not losing the game (if he or she controlled a Laquatus's Champion or Soul Scourge that had targeted her or him when it came into play).  So, sadly, I see no way around Oblivion Ring exiling a permanent permanently if the player controlling the ring is defeated.
"We will all be purified in Wurm. What is good will be used to heal Wurm, or grow Wurm, or to fuel Wurm's path. What is vile will be extruded, and we will be free of it forever." --Prophet of the Cult of Wurm
Sign In to post comments