Priority

80 posts / 0 new
Last post
If I cast a spell during another player's turn, who gets priority afterward?
Rules Advisor
you
but a shortcut is assumed that you pass that priority, if you want to keep it, speak up

however, after a spell or ability resolves the active player gets priority, no matter who controlled the spell or ability
proud member of the 2011 community team
The spell's controller. (That's the only exception to AP gets priorty first, I believe.)
601.2h Once the steps described in 601.2a–g are completed, the spell becomes cast. Any abilities that trigger when a spell is cast or put onto the stack trigger at this time. If the spell’s controller had priority before casting it, he or she gets priority.

but a shortcut is assumed that you pass that priority, if you want to keep it, speak up

Where is this documented?

in the tournament rules: www.wizards.com/wpn/Document.aspx?x=Magi...
Whenever a player adds an object to the stack, he or she is assumed to be passing priority unless he or she explicitly announces that he or she intends to retain it. If he or she adds a group of objects to the stack without explicitly retaining priority and a player wishes to take an action at a point in the middle, the actions should be reversed up to that point.

proud member of the 2011 community team
Thanks. Was searching for "cast".
but a shortcut is assumed that you pass that priority, if you want to keep it, speak up

Where is this documented?




In the tournament rules.


From the MTR:

4.2. Tournament Shortcuts 

Whenever a player adds an object to the stack, he or she is assumed to be passing priority unless he or she explicitly announces that he or she intends to retain it. If he or she adds a group of objects to the stack without explicitly retaining priority and a player wishes to take an action at a point in the middle, the actions should be reversed up to that point.

DCI Level 2 Judge

Rockford, Illinois

Do keep in mind that while casual games of magic should (and do) take cues from the tournament rules, they are in no way bound by them.

If who has priority matters during a casual game, the polite thing to do would be to ask for clarification rather than assuming that the other player passed because he didn't speak up.

On the other hand, I fully agree with everyone here that it's in one's best interest to make it a habit to speak up when you want to retain priority.
Wait, what?

If he or she adds a group of objects to the stack without explicitly retaining priority and a player wishes to take an action at a point in the middle, the actions should be reversed up to that point.



How is putting multiple objects on the stack in succession not explicitly retaining priority? Shouldn't the fact that you immediately put another object on the stack be evidence that you rejected the assumed shortcut?
Rules Advisor
no, you have to speak up after every spell/ability
in a casual setting it can be more relaxed, but this is the official way to do it
proud member of the 2011 community team
That makes no sense. How did you play something in response to your own spell or after your spell resolved if you didn't retain priority? If you did, you must have explicitely retained priority (by responding to your own spell or not letting the game advance to the next step). As such, the only point to which the opponent could reverse the game is to when you had priority, from where you can repeat exactly what was just reversed.

Picture this:

It's my first main phase. "I cast Llanowar Elves." Opponent replies "ok", resolving the elves. "I cast Grizzly Bears." Opponent replies "ok", resolving the bears. "I attack with my Saproling". Opponent replies "Judge! My opponent tried to attack in the Ending Phase!"

How is this ok?!?!?! Does anyone play like that???

the shortcut to go to the end phase is "go", not saying nothing
proud member of the 2011 community team
Ok, fine, you're in your second main phase without priority. Can't attack then either.

You ended your first main phase by casting the Grizzly Bears after passing priority (by not explicitly keeping priority), and seeing as Grizzly Bears can only be cast in a main phase, you shortcuted your attack phase away by casting them. (A shortcut your opponent accepted by letting you resolve them.)

[updated]
only when casting a spell or activating an ability
that is a specific situation
proud member of the 2011 community team
Casting Grizzly Bears is casting a spell (see correction in my last post)
When you just say "I cast Llanowar Elves", that's implictly passing priority to the opponent. If they then say "ok", they're passing priority back, allowing the Elves to resolve. In order for the game to progress to the next step/phase, there would need to be another pair of priority passes, and they aren't part of that shortcut.
Casting Grizzly Bears is casting a spell (see correction in my last post)

don't confuse casting and resolving spells
proud member of the 2011 community team
Got it. casting passes, resolving doesn't. Bad example. Ignore it and just answer the original question, then:
That makes no sense. How did you play something in response to your own spell or after your spell resolved if you didn't retain priority? If you did, you must have explicitely retained priority (by responding to your own spell or not letting the game advance to the next step). As such, the only point to which the opponent could reverse the game is to when you had priority, from where you can repeat exactly what was just reversed.




since you cast them all without explicitly holding priority your opponent is in his right to interrupt your shortcut and cast something on his own

since you passed the priority by not speaking up this works
proud member of the 2011 community team
If you just say "Cast Llanowar Elves and Grizzly Bears", that means "Cast Llanowar Elves, pass priority, wait for you to pass it back, cast Grizzly Bears, pass priority". If your opponent wants to cast something between the two, they can make you put the Grizzly Bears back in your hand and make their response with Llanowar Elves still on the stack.

For a more plausible situation, if someone has a Drifting Shade and says "pump it for 5", and the opponent wants to destroy it with Lightning Bolt, they could say "in response to the third activation, Bolt it". The player would then untap the two Swamps that didn't end up being used.
of course, this shortcut doesn't work in corner cases like Reverbate your own spell, in that case there is no other way to cast it except to keep priority

but in most cases the shortcut works fine, it also protects you from Mindbreak Trap ;)
proud member of the 2011 community team
since you cast them all without explicitly holding priority your opponent is in his right to interrupt your shortcut and cast something on his own

My question was "How did you play something in response to your own spell if you didn't retain priority?" Your answer makes no sense for that question.
If you just say "Cast Llanowar Elves and Grizzly Bears"

You can't cast Grizzly Bears in response to an Elf. They don't have flash.

My question is "How did you play something in response to your own spell if you didn't retain priority?"
Maybe this will work better if I provide an example.

Me: "I cast [C]Prey Upon[/C] on my Elf and your Goblin, and in response, I cast [C]Giant Growth[/C]" on my Elf.
Opponent: "Please rollback to when I had priority before Giant Growth was cast"
Opponent: "I pass, so Fight resolves. It sucks to be you that it's too late to play Giant Growth!"

How is that ok?!?!?!?! Does anyone play this way???

If you just say "Cast Llanowar Elves and Ashcoat Bear", it's still the same thing. The shortcut says that this means you're allowing the Elves to resolve before casting the Bear.

I don't understand why you're asking that question.

If you say that you're casting the second spell in response to the first, that clearly means you are maintaining priority, so the shortcut doesn't apply. There's no rollback possible there. However, if you say you're casting multiple spells without saying anything about "maintaining priority" or "in response", that means you're casting them sequentially, allowing each to resolve before casting the next.
I don't understand why you're asking that question.

Perhaps if you stopped thinking about an irrelevant example. We've already established that it makes a difference whether you gain priorty after a spell resolves or after you cast a spell. There's an example that was posted while you were composing your post.

Maybe this will work better if I provide an example.

Me: "I cast [C]Prey Upon[/C] on my Elf and your Goblin, and in response, I cast [C]Giant Growth[/C]" on my Elf.
Opponent: "Please rollback to when I had priority before Giant Growth was cast"
Opponent: "I pass, so Fight resolves. It sucks to be you that it's too late to play Giant Growth!"

How is that ok?!?!?!?! Does anyone play this way???


Opponent never had priority since you explicitely stated that you retained Priority. He can't roll you back.

If I steal a hundred dollar from a loot of one thousand, people might notice;

If I steal a hundred dollar from a loot of one million, I might get away with it;

If I wish to steal even more and still go unnoticed, I need to make the loot bigger.

 

Now you know why taxes always go up.

 

Looting: ''the plundering of public assets by corrupt or greedy authorities'' (Wikipedia)

No, I implicitly retained priorty. That I retain priority is implied by the fact that I want to cast something else. The rule specifically says I must do so explicitly. That would require saying "I retain priority" or something to that effect.

explicit: clearly stated and leaving nothing implied
implicit: implied though not directly expressed
Me: "I cast [C]Prey Upon[/C] on my Elf and your Goblin, and in response, I cast [C]Giant Growth[/C]" on my Elf.

Is that your definition of implicit?

Do take note, however, that I'm with you on this subject: that rule sucks.

If I steal a hundred dollar from a loot of one thousand, people might notice;

If I steal a hundred dollar from a loot of one million, I might get away with it;

If I wish to steal even more and still go unnoticed, I need to make the loot bigger.

 

Now you know why taxes always go up.

 

Looting: ''the plundering of public assets by corrupt or greedy authorities'' (Wikipedia)

the shortcut might not be perfect, but if it was reversed it would be worse
proud member of the 2011 community team
Me: "I cast [C]Prey Upon[/C] on my Elf and your Goblin, and in response, I cast [C]Giant Growth[/C]" on my Elf.

Is that your definition of implicit?

Trick question, since you didn't ask what I'm being implicit about. I'm explictely not letting Prey Upon resolve, but I'm only implicitely retaining priority.

But let's say I accept your view that I'm explicitely retaining priority. If so, then I can't possibly respond to a spell without explicitly retaining priority, and the rulling can never used. That doesn't make sense either.

you can't respond to your own spell without explicitly retaining priority, correct (some obvious exceptions like Reverberate do of course still exist)
proud member of the 2011 community team
No, I implicitly retained priorty. That I retain priority is implied by the fact that I want to cast something else. The rule specifically says I must do so explicitly. That would requiring saying "I retain priority" or something to that effect.

No. It means that you must make it clear that you intend you respond to your own spell/ability without letting it resolve. Whether you use the words "I retain priority", or "I do X, and in response Y", or "I do X, and before it resolves, Y", doesn't matter.

Me: "I cast [C]Prey Upon[/C] on my Elf and your Goblin, and in response, I cast [C]Giant Growth[/C]" on my Elf.

You made it clear that you intended to respond to your own spell, so you did. No shortcut, no implicit passing of priority. No rules-lawyering.

Do take note, however, that I'm with you on this subject: that rule sucks.

This shortcut exists because in the vast majority of cases when a player puts something on the stack they won't want to respond to their own spell or ability. It is also how the vast majority of cases are handled in the vast majority of games, anyway. Or how many games do you see around you where both players consistently go "cast X, pass", or "cast X, resolves?".

DCI Lvl 2 Judge

I just want to add my two cents here: I have very rarely, if not never, announced an instant along with another spell without intending to retain priority and respond to my own casting.

When I want a spell to resolve, I say "after that resolves, I cast whatever." I understand that the rules work against me here -- but in every situation that it's come up for me, it made no sense or no difference to wait until the first spell resolved.

I'm not saying that the ruling should be reversed. Personally, I can't think of a better way to handle it. But I do think that some judgment ought to be applied, and one should not assume their opponent made a mistake in order to take advantage of it.
No, I implicitly retained priorty. That I retain priority is implied by the fact that I want to cast something else. The rule specifically says I must do so explicitly. That would requiring saying "I retain priority" or something to that effect.

No. It means that you must make it clear that you intend you respond to your own spell/ability without letting it resolve. Whether you use the words "I retain priority", or "I do X, and in response Y", or "I do X, and before it resolves, Y", doesn't matter.

By that definition, I retain priority every time I cast something in response to my own spell. This means the rulling never applies. That makes no sense either, as I've already explained.
when I say "I cast Shock and Lightning Bolt targetting you" it means "I cast Shock and propose a shortcut to let it resolve and after that I cast Lightning Bolt targetting you"

the shortcut makes sense otherwise a lot of games would just be "I cast X, pass priority" instead of just "I cast X"
keeping priority after casting a spell is the exception, not the rule (well, it is the rule, but you know what I mean)
proud member of the 2011 community team
By that definition, I retain priority every time I cast something in response to my own spell. This means the rulling never applies. That makes no sense either, as I've already explained.

I suppose you're referring to this post:
But let's say I accept your view that I'm explicitely retaining priority. If so, then I can't possibly respond to a spell without explicitly retaining priority, and the rulling can never used. That doesn't make sense either.

You can never respond to your own spell without retaining priority after casting the first spell, unless your opponent responds. In other words, if you want to be sure that you can respond to your own spell, you have to respond before passing priority; otherwise your opponent might just simply pass, too, and your spell will resolve without your getting another chance to respond. This tournament shortcut doesn't change that at all.

The shortcut simply means: if you make it clear that you intend to respond to your own spell/ability, then you do. If you don't make it clear that you want to respond, it is assumed that you cast the first spell, let it resolve, then cast the second, and so on.

It also means that if you "cast A and in response B", it is assumed that you pass priority after casting B. Unless of course you make it clear that you want to again respond to B.

DCI Lvl 2 Judge

The shortcut saves time and torture in tournament play.

The vast, vast majority of the time, when you intend to cast multiple spells or activate multiple abilities, the correct course of action from a strategic standpoint is to let one spell/ability resolve before moving on to the next. Casting multiple spells/activating multiple abilities in response to each other gives your opponent information unnecessarily and opens you up to a blowout. However, even though it's the proper course of action, letting each spell/activation resolve before moving on to the next can be excruciatingly slow. Imagine the following exchange:
Show
"I swing with Psychatog. You have no creatures, so no blocks?"
"No blocks."
"Discard one to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"2/3. Discard one to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"3/4. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"4/5. Discard one to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"5/6. Discard one to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"6/7. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"7/8. Discard one to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"8/9. Discard one to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"9/10. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"10/11. Discard one to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"11/12. Discard one to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"12/13. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"13/14. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"14/15. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"15/16. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"16/17. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"17/18. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"18/19. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"19/20. Exile two to pump. Resolves?"
"Resolves."
"20/21. Combat damage?"
"Tap plains to Swords 'Tog before damage."

Painful, isn't it? Yet this is the strategically correct line of play. As such, players would effectively be forced to do it that way in high-level tournament play. Doing otherwise would be giving their opponent a better chance of winning.

Nobody wants to have to spend two minutes buffing and re-buffing the P/T of a single creature. Nobody wants the game to be painful to play correctly. Hence, the shortcut, which effectively translates the way normal people play into the strategically correct line of play.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

The shortcut simply means: if you make it clear that you intend to respond to your own spell/ability, then you do. If you don't make it clear that you want to respond, it is assumed that you cast the first spell, let it resolve, then cast the second, and so on.

No way.

"If he or she adds a group of objects to the stack without explicitly retaining priority" implies that you could have retained priority. It's impossible to retain priority if the spells aren't cast in response to each other, so that makes no sense either.

This ruling is pure garbage as written. So far in this thread, I've been told it means three or four different things, and none of them make sense.

The shortcut saves time and torture in tournament play.

This shortcut you speak of would be great, but the one we're talking about doesn't do that. See my previous post for why.