Misleading shortcuts

27 posts / 0 new
Last post
I have recently put together a deck surrounding Immolating Souleater, which can win on turn 3 if the opponent doesn't block. To that end, I've been thinking about how to get around the problem of most people having blockers by turn 3. Obviously, I'll need to play mind games to get them to choose not to block.

So I let's say it's my turn. I draw my card, sit there for a second (pretending to consider my options), then I just tap the souleater and say, "I guess I'll ping you." The statement would seem to imply that I intend only to deal 1 damage, but does it mean that implicitly? My question is: after such a proposed shortcut, would I have the option of pumping up the souleater after finding out if my opponent chooses to block, or would that statement propose that we go from main phase to end of combat without playing anything or blocking?

I guess the core of the question is, can you bluff with shortcuts by suggesting one, but then interrupting it?

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

A tournament shortcut is an action taken by players to skip parts of the technical play sequence without explicitly announcing them. Tournament shortcuts are essential for the smooth play of a game, as they allow players to play in a clear fashion without getting bogged down in the minutia of the rules. Most tournament shortcuts involve skipping one or more priority passes to the mutual understanding of all players; if a player wishes to demonstrate or use a new tournament shortcut entailing any number of priority passes, he or she must be clear where the game state will end up as part of the request.


A player may interrupt a tournament shortcut by explaining how he or she is deviating from it or at which point in the middle he or she wishes to take an action. If the players are confused by the use of a tournament shortcut, they should be backed up to the beginning of the shortcut and no penalty should be issued (though they should be reminded to play more clearly). A player is not allowed to use a previously undeclared tournament shortcut, or to modify an in-use tournament shortcut without announcing the modification, in order to create ambiguity in the game.

All Generalizations are Bad
I guess the core of the question is, can you bluff with shortcuts by suggesting one, but then interrupting it?


Of course not.  Otherwise something like this would be legal:

I suggest the shortcut "Pass the turn" which means that each of us will pass priority while taking no other action until you have priority in my End step.

You accept my shortcut, and pass priority at every opportunity while taking no other action.

During my declare attackers step, I interrupt the shortcut and attack you with my 20/20 trample unblockable indestructible creature, since you just passed priority as per my short cut instead of tapping it down with your tumble magnet.

---

Once the opponent accepts a proposed shortcut, the next thing that happens is the shortcut happens as proposed.  Once you propose a shortcut, there's no backing out.  They can either accept it, and it happens, or they can shorten it, and part of it happens, or they can reject it and nothing will happen, but it's up to the opponent which of these things happens, the player who proposed the shortcut has nothing to say about it at this point.
MTG Rules Advisor since 2007-06-27. Amateur MTG rules nerd since forever. Download the official rules and more at wizards.com/magic/rules -[ IronMagus' New Marketplace Trade Thread ]- 100+ completed trades!
Even if you could get away with this (and, if you word your attack carefully enough, you can be misleading without lying and be within the rules: "May as well get in for a little. Any blockers?"), it can be a little unsporting. Besides, there are ways to get around blockers (kill them, for example), and you should probably rely on those before you delve into "being a jerk in order to win more" if possible.
Rules Nut Advisor


then I just tap the souleater and say, "I guess I'll ping you."




If you say this to me, I then ask you, "How are you pinging me?" Pinging is what Jonny does (Prodigal Sorcerer).
"Oh, you're attacking me? Yeah, I will chump block with Fugitive Wizard."


i'd say "attack for one, any blockers?"
then if there are no blockers you are free to pump it up
proud member of the 2011 community team
Can I just ask how you win on the third turn with only Immolating Souleater? Because even if you played:

Turn 1: Bolt, down to 17.

Turn 2: Immolating Souleater

Turn 3: Bolt, Bolt again, attack and pump 9 times for 10 damage, opponent down to 1.

... you obviously wouldn't have won. And that's WITH a God-hand.
Can I just ask how you win on the third turn with only Immolating Souleater? Because even if you played:

Turn 1: Bolt, down to 17.

Turn 2: Immolating Souleater

Turn 3: Bolt, Bolt again, attack and pump 9 times for 10 damage, opponent down to 1.

... you obviously wouldn't have won. And that's WITH a God-hand.


Assault Strobe and Double Cleave make a convincing argument.

Zammm = Batman.

It's my sig in a box
58280208 wrote:
Everything is better when you read it in Bane's voice.
192334281 wrote:
Your human antics and desire to continue living have moved me. Just kidding. You cannot move me physically or emotionally. Wall humor.
57092228 wrote:
Copy effects work like a photocopy machine: you get a copy of the 'naked' card, NOT of what's on it.
56995928 wrote:
Funny story: InQuest Magazine (I think it was InQuest) had an oversized Chaos Orb which I totally rooked someone into allowing into a (non-sanctioned) game. I had a proxy card that was a Mountain with "Chaos Orb" written on it. When I played it, my opponent cried foul: Him: "WTF? a Proxy? no-one said anything about Proxies. Do you even own an actual Chaos Orb?" Me: "Yes, but I thought it would be better to use a Proxy." Him: "No way. If you're going to put a Chaos Orb in your deck you have to use your actual Chaos Orb." Me: "*Sigh*. Okay." I pulled out this huge Chaos Orb and placed it on the table. He tried to cry foul again but everyone else said he insisted I use my actual Chaos Orb and that was my actual Chaos Orb. I used it, flipped it and wiped most of his board. Unsurprisingly, that only worked once and only because everyone present thought it was hilarious.
My DM on Battleminds:
no, see i can kill defenders, but 8 consecutive crits on a battlemind, eh walk it off.
144543765 wrote:
195392035 wrote:
Hi guys! So, I'm a sort of returning player to Magic. I say sort of because as a child I had two main TCG's I liked. Yu-Gi-Oh, and Pokemon. Some of my friends branched off in to Magic, and I bought two pre-made decks just to kind of fit in. Like I said, Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon were what I really knew how to play. I have a extensive knowledge of deck building in those two TCG's. However, as far as Magic is concerned, I only ever used those two pre made decks. I know how the game is played, and I know general things, but now I want to get in the game for real. I want to begin playing it as a regular. My question is, are all cards ever released from the time of the inception of this game until present day fair game in a deck? Or are there special rules? Are some cards forbidden or restricted? Thanks guys, and I will gladly accept ANY help lol.
I have the same problem with women.
117639611 wrote:
198869283 wrote:
Oh I have a standing rule. If someone plays a Planeswalker I concede the game. I refuse to play with or against people who play Planeswalkers. They really did ruin the game.
A turn two Tibalt win?! Wicked... Betcha don't see that everyday.

The Pony Co. 

Is this my new ego sig? Yes it is, other Barry
57461258 wrote:
And that's why you should never, ever call RP Jesus on being a troll, because then everyone else playing along gets outed, too, and the thread goes back to being boring.
57461258 wrote:
See, this is why RPJesus should be in charge of the storyline. The novel line would never have been cancelled if he had been running the show. Specifically the Slobad and Geth's Head talkshow he just described.
57461258 wrote:
Not only was that an obligatory joke, it was an on-topic post that still managed to be off-topic due to thread derailment. RP Jesus does it again folks.
92481331 wrote:
I think I'm gonna' start praying to Jesus... That's right, RPJesus, I'm gonna' be praying to you, right now. O' Jesus Please continue to make my time here on the forums fun and cause me to chuckle. Amen.
92481331 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
It was wonderful. Us Johnnies had a field day. That Timmy with the Grizzly bears would actually have to think about swinging into your Mogg Fanatic, giving you time to set up your silly combo. Nowadays it's all DERPSWING! with thier blue jeans and their MP3 players and their EM EM OH AR PEE JEES and their "Dewmocracy" and their children's card games and their Jersey Shores and their Tattooed Tenaged Vampire Hunters from Beverly Hills
Seriously, that was amazing. I laughed my *ss off. Made my day, and I just woke up.
[quote=ArtVenn You're still one of my favorite people... just sayin'.[/quote]
56756068 wrote:
56786788 wrote:
.....would it be a bit blasphemous if I said, "PRAYSE RPJAYSUS!" like an Evangelical preacher?
Perhaps, but who doesn't like to blaspheme every now and again? Especially when Mr. RPJesus is completely right.
56756068 wrote:
I don't say this often, but ... LOL
57526128 wrote:
You... You... Evil something... I actualy made the damn char once I saw the poster... Now you made me see it again and I gained resolve to put it into my campaign. Shell be high standing oficial of Cyrix order. Uterly mad and only slightly evil. And it'll be bad. Evil even. And ill blame you and Lizard for it :P.
57042968 wrote:
111809331 wrote:
I'm trying to work out if you're being sarcastic here. ...
Am going to stop you right there... it's RPJesus... he's always sarcastic
58335208 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
112114441 wrote:
we can only hope it gets the jace treatment...it could have at least been legendary
So that even the decks that don't run it run it to deal with it? Isn't that like the definition of format warping?
I lol'd.
56287226 wrote:
98088088 wrote:
Uktabi Orangutan What the heck's going on with those monkeys?
The most common answer is that they are what RPJesus would call "[Debutantes avert your eyes]ing."
56965458 wrote:
Show
57461258 wrote:
116498949 wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because off-topic discussions are a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_... Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively. If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
...Am I the only one that thinks this is reaching the point of downright Kafkaesque insanity?
I condone the use of the word Kafkaesque. However, I'm presentely ambivalent. I mean, that can't be serious, right? We're April 1st, right? They didn't mod RPJesus for off-topic discussion when the WHOLE THREAD IS OFF-TOPIC, right? Right.
57545908 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
Save or die. If you disagree with this, you're wrong (Not because of any points or arguements that have been made, but I just rolled a d20 for you and got a 1, so you lose).
58397368 wrote:
58222628 wrote:
This just won the argument, AFAIC.
That's just awesome.
57471038 wrote:
57718868 wrote:
HOW DID I NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BEAR PRODUCING WORDS OF WILDING?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME?!
That's what RPJesus tends to do. That's why I don't think he's a real person, but some Magic Card Archive Server sort of machine, that is programmed to react to other posters' comments with obscure cards that do in fact exist, but somehow missed by even the most experienced Magic players. And then come up with strange combos with said cards. All of that is impossible for a normal human to do given the amount of time he does it and how often he does it. He/It got me with Light of Sanction, which prompted me to go to RQ&A to try and find if it was even possible to do combat damage to a creature I control (in light that Mark of Asylum exists).
71235715 wrote:
+10
100176878 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
57078538 wrote:
heaven or hell.
Round 1. Lets rock.
GG quotes! RPJesus just made this thread win!
56906968 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
143359585 wrote:
Blue players get all the overpowerered cards like JTMS. I think it's time that wizards gave something to people who remember what magic is really about: creatures.
Initially yes, Wizards was married to blue. However, about a decade ago they had a nasty divorce, and a few years after that they began courting the attention of Green. Then in Worldwake they had a nasty affair with their ex, but as of Innistrad, things seem to have gotten back on track, and Wizards has even proposed.
You are my favorite. Yes you. And moments like this make it so. Thank you RPJesus for just being you.
On what flavor text fits me:
57307308 wrote:
Surely RPJesus gets Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius?
56874518 wrote:
First: I STILL can't take you seriously with that avatar. And I can take RPJesus seriously, so that's saying something.
121689989 wrote:
I'd offer you a cookie for making me laugh but it has an Upkeep Cost that has been known to cause people to quit eating.
56267956 wrote:
I <3 you loads
57400888 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
"AINT NO LAWS IN THE SKY MOTHER****." - Agrus Kos, Wojek Veteran
10/10. Amazing.
Can I just ask how you win on the third turn with only Immolating Souleater? Because even if you played:

Turn 1: Bolt, down to 17.

Turn 2: Immolating Souleater

Turn 3: Bolt, Bolt again, attack and pump 9 times for 10 damage, opponent down to 1.

... you obviously wouldn't have won. And that's WITH a God-hand.

Tap the 3rd land to pump it one more time.
Meh. I was under the impression that he was just paying as much life as he wanted to without stopping before 0.
Meh. I was under the impression that he was just paying as much life as he wanted to without stopping before 0.

You are right that it is quite implausible this hand would happen. Maybe in addition to "shortcuts" in the game, he is using a "creative shuffling techinque" before the game starts.
The deck combos Immolating Souleater and/or Kiln Fiend with either Assault Strobe or Fling. In either event, it requires my opponent not to block.

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

Unless this is specifically for Standard play, False Orders is what you're looking for.

In Standard, your best bet is Smoldering Spires, though you have other options.  They aren't necessarily guarantees, and may preclude turn 3 kills if you must use them, but they are usable.

Ultimately, I agree with an earlier poster in this thread, find your solutions in the cards, not in being a jerk.

Somnia, the Evanescent Plane -- A 3-set Block
Set 1 — Somnia
Set 2 — TBD
Set 3 — TBD
Planeswalker's Guide to Somnia

Build Around This
A weekly MTG Cards and Combos forum game.
Build Around This #1 - Sage's Starfish Wish
BAT #1 was built using the Legacy format with Spiny Starfish, Sage's Knowledge, and Make a Wish. Winner: Dilleux_Lepaire with Fishy Starfishies. Runner-Up: JBTM
I have Panic Spellbombs and cheapo removal spells as my answer to potential blockers; my question was only about the nature of psychological trickery that I may employ. The rules for shortcuts are a little harder for me to parse than the rest of the rules, for some reason. Obviously, the proposed shortcut in my original post would preclude me from pumping it, so I'll need to be more subtle.

Maybe something like, "Might as well swing..." Then if they try to adjust their life total by 1 without asking if I'm playing anything, I can take that as them not declaring blockers, and proceed to pump for the win. Wouldn't that be a proposed shortcut on their part, albeit a non-verbal one?

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

I have Panic Spellbombs and cheapo removal spells as my answer to potential blockers; my question was only about the nature of psychological trickery that I may employ. The rules for shortcuts are a little harder for me to parse than the rest of the rules, for some reason. Obviously, the proposed shortcut in my original post would preclude me from pumping it, so I'll need to be more subtle.

Maybe something like, "Might as well swing..." Then if they try to adjust their life total by 1 without asking if I'm playing anything, I can take that as them not declaring blockers, and proceed to pump for the win. Wouldn't that be a proposed shortcut on their part, albeit a non-verbal one?


Or just say, "I'm attacking with a 1/1. Any blockers?" I personally like this method because it states exactly what you're doing up until the declare blockers step. Only thing is I don't know if they would avoid blocking it due to the question, especially if you assault strobed it first.
Level 1 Judge. Feel free to call me out on any errors. I'm only human, and am working to improve.
Regardless of which shortcut you choose to say, your opponent still understands what your card is capable of (at least I hope), so if you say "I guess I'll ping you" and they move to lower their life total by: paper, calculator, what have you, then I'd say you're free to pump, they clearly are accepting the attack by not choosing blockers and starting to reduce their life total. In this scenario, if I saw my opponent making a move towards their life tracker, I would continue with, "after declare blockers step, pump."
Regardless of which shortcut you choose to say, your opponent still understands what your card is capable of (at least I hope), so if you say "I guess I'll ping you" and they move to lower their life total by: paper, calculator, what have you, then I'd say you're free to pump, they clearly are accepting the attack by not choosing blockers and starting to reduce their life total. In this scenario, if I saw my opponent making a move towards their life tracker, I would continue with, "after declare blockers step, pump."


You have to be careful though. If what you say falls under proposing a shortcut, you won't get a chance to back out of it halfway. the point here is to be clear just how far you're proposing to shortcut to, or to make sure you're saying something which won't/can't be construed as a shortcut so you are able to "back out".
Level 1 Judge. Feel free to call me out on any errors. I'm only human, and am working to improve.
I personally can't think of a scenario where you'd want to back out of your own shortcut. Like saying, "pass turn....at the end of turn." If YOU use the shortcut, that's basically saying you are choosing to skip all steps/phases inbetween, it's your opponent who can back it up to a certain point because they didn't get a say in the matter.
I personally can't think of a scenario where you'd want to back out of your own shortcut. Like saying, "pass turn....at the end of turn." If YOU use the shortcut, that's basically saying you are choosing to skip all steps/phases inbetween, it's your opponent who can back it up to a certain point because they didn't get a say in the matter.


The idea would be similar to saying, "I pass," in order to seeing if your opponent is going to use their Tumble Magnet on your big, bad critter before you declare attackers. If he allows you to pass your turn, you cannot then interrupt your own shortcut by jumping into the Declare Attackers step, even though your opponent declined to use Tumble Magnet during the Beginning of Combat step.

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

I completely agree. That's basically what I was trying to say, when you say "pass" you're saying "I skip the rest of my steps and phases and move straight to cleanup, I.E. you can start your turn now.
Unless this is specifically for Standard play, False Orders is what you're looking for.

In Standard, your best bet is Smoldering Spires, though you have other options.  They aren't necessarily guarantees, and may preclude turn 3 kills if you must use them, but they are usable.

Ultimately, I agree with an earlier poster in this thread, find your solutions in the cards, not in being a jerk.


Am I the only one that finds it absolutely hilarious that someone who has an ancient Card (Channel, long time no see!) as an Avatar proposes an equally ancient Card as a solution?

Regardless of which shortcut you choose to say, your opponent still understands what your card is capable of (at least I hope), so if you say "I guess I'll ping you" and they move to lower their life total by: paper, calculator, what have you, then I'd say you're free to pump, they clearly are accepting the attack by not choosing blockers and starting to reduce their life total. In this scenario, if I saw my opponent making a move towards their life tracker, I would continue with, "after declare blockers step, pump."


But pnging implies dealing one point of damage, so in this version, not using the punp ability is part of the shortcut.
If you go "Well, might as well swing" (NOT "swing for one"), you may pump, but otherwise, it falls under trying to create an ambigous gamestate.
[c]Forest[/c] gives you Forest
If you go "Well, might as well swing" (NOT "swing for one"), you may pump, but otherwise, it falls under trying to create an ambigous gamestate.


Is it trying to create an ambiguous gamestate, or is it simply announcing that I am attacking? If I attack with my creature, then wait for my opponent to take the next action (by either blocking or not), and he tries to jump ahead to taking damage, that's HIS shortcut that I'm interrupting.

Also, with my knights deck (which runs a lot of continuous pump effects), I've gotten into the habit of announcing the size of each attacking creature when I attack, to take into account bonuses granted by continuous effects like Battle Cry. If I say, "I'm attacking with a 1/1," that's just informing my opponent of what is attacking, and doesn't imply any shortcut. If my opponent then assumes that I'm not pumping, and tries to adjust his life total, that's HIM proposing the shortcut, leaving me to pump after he hasn't declared attackers, right?

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

Yes, if you say "I'm attacking with a 1/1" that's not proposing a shortcut to pass until damage. If your opponent goes to mark his life total, that's almost certainly a shortcut for declaring no blockers, but you need to make sure your opponent is actually doing that, not taking notes or something.
All Generalizations are Bad
Yes, if you say "I'm attacking with a 1/1" that's not proposing a shortcut to pass until damage. If your opponent goes to mark his life total, that's almost certainly a shortcut for declaring no blockers, but you need to make sure your opponent is actually doing that, not taking notes or something.


Excellent. That's how I shall run it, then.

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

I have played with this deck, and it is quite fun. It's very fast and can often win games on that alone, especially when you get someone with the turn 3 Immolating Souleater for the win when they weren't expecting it. However, Assault Strobe is a sorcery, and most people are not going to fall for "Oh, I just gave my pumpable creature double-strike, but I'm only going to swing for 2." Fling is the better and more surprising option, since once you've hit them for 10 with the Souleater, they can't remove it in response to the Fling.

However, both strategies are vulnerable to blockers/counterspells and leave you at two life, so are pretty dangerous.

You might try Wrap in Flames, but it pushes your fatal swing back to turn 5 or 6, which is not good for you.
Unless this is specifically for Standard play, False Orders is what you're looking for.

In Standard, your best bet is Smoldering Spires, though you have other options.  They aren't necessarily guarantees, and may preclude turn 3 kills if you must use them, but they are usable.

Ultimately, I agree with an earlier poster in this thread, find your solutions in the cards, not in being a jerk.


Am I the only one that finds it absolutely hilarious that someone who has an ancient Card (Channel, long time no see!) as an Avatar proposes an equally ancient Card as a solution?



Well, whatever works best, right ;)  That pretty much would be the best option, since your opponent is unlikely to declare anything more than a chump blocker against the Souleater, and you get skirt all this ambiguous talk about announcing a misleading shortcut that isn't so misleading it's breaking the rules, but is misleading enough to trick your opponent.  Though I suppose if I really wanted to talk old cards, it would be easier to just Berserk the thing and then Fling it.  No combat step required.

Besides, I know the older cards much better than newer cards (and newer rules, sigh). 

Somnia, the Evanescent Plane -- A 3-set Block
Set 1 — Somnia
Set 2 — TBD
Set 3 — TBD
Planeswalker's Guide to Somnia

Build Around This
A weekly MTG Cards and Combos forum game.
Build Around This #1 - Sage's Starfish Wish
BAT #1 was built using the Legacy format with Spiny Starfish, Sage's Knowledge, and Make a Wish. Winner: Dilleux_Lepaire with Fishy Starfishies. Runner-Up: JBTM
However, both strategies are vulnerable to blockers/counterspells


I run Ricochet Traps for counterspells, and burny removal for blockers (and Panic Spellbomb for unburnable blockers)

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

Sign In to post comments