2.4. Conceding or Intentionally Drawing Games or Matches

54 posts / 0 new
Last post
Some players are having a discussion with our local Judge about this rule, he says its not considered bribery if two players decide to end on a tie or give the other player a win if they just want to get to the next round of a friday night, pre-release or just a sanctioned tournament.

We say that they get the points and the possibility of being top 8 and getting their hands on boosters (and specially since they almost always do this between team members giving their team an advantage to qualify for boosters.

Any help will be most apreciated.
predetermining the result of a match is against the rules

however, any player can concede at any time, so you have to somehow prove the intent of the player
for example he can concede because he already made Top8 and wants more off-time to prepare for those matches
proud member of the 2011 community team
let me correct myself, what I ment when I said "they just want to get to the next round of a friday night, pre-release or just a sanctioned tournament" I ment that they dont want to have 2-0 or 2-1 against so they either go for a draw of give the win to the player who's won the most.
Players may concede or mutually agree to a draw in any game or match. Either player may concede a match to the other, though if the conceding player won a game in the match, the match must be reported as 2-1. Intentional draws are always reported as 0-0-3.

Players may not agree to a concession or draw in exchange for any reward or incentive. Doing so will be considered Bribery.
sure, that's legal
they can concede for any reason

what would not be legal is "I'll let you win if you give me a booster"
proud member of the 2011 community team
what would not be legal is "I'll let you win if you give me a booster"

Yes, such is the rule.
But I have to admit I don't understand the reason for such a rule to exist.

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

what would not be legal is "I'll let you win if you give me a booster"

Yes, such is the rule.
But I have to admit I don't understand the reason for such a rule to exist.


You - in other contexts, the big champion of (what you see as) fairness - don't understand why bribery isn't okay?

If that's really what you're saying, the only reply I can give is the one Louis Armstrong gave when asked what jazz was, which was to shake his head sadly and say "man, if you have to ask, you'll never know".
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
I have proven to be able to understand... when explained simply and clearly. -and with lots of patience ;)
Evading answer by quoting successful music performers seems like an easy way out.
Maybe I will never know.
A sure thing if I don't try.
I'm willing to try. Are you?

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

that rule is there because otherwise it would create a tournament atmosphere where it is more about trading wins than actually playing the game
proud member of the 2011 community team
Bribery is used to make someone do what they should not;
players may wish to try & win a game,
but I don't think we can pretend that they should
 
What has been demanded from the player is to cease trying to win,
which he may or may not wish for,
but which it cannot be said that he shouldn't.

Therefore, the act in question is not «bribery».
(even though that is the word used by those who wrote that rule) 

Of course, if the player has engaged himself into tring to win, then he should.   
Then again, I guess the by default assumption is that anyone entering the game should try & win,
and anyone else should not play.  

Ah! Under such an assumption it does become bribery.
Which is bad. (for all of those who don't realize it)

 



that rule is there because otherwise it would create a tournament atmosphere where it is more about trading wins than actually playing the game

Thank you.

I would deduce that the motive is enjoyment; to preserve the atmosphere.
As a «champion of fairness», I feel relieved: since I tried evaluating the rule under Good/Bad paradigms, I could not find justification, unless under specific assumptions pertaining to the gaming environment.
But having fun is OK, so if this rule actually(?) improves game enjoyment, I'll buy it!

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

just imagine if the rule wasn't there
the first thing your opponent will do before you start the match is offer you something in exchange for a win, maybe he wants the planeswalker points, maybe he wants the bragging rights of having been in the final (or even "won"), there are lots of reasons to win besides just the price which he will have to give away as bribes

that's not a scenario I'd enjoy
I'd rather just play for playing's sake and not being bribed or possibly bullied into conceding
proud member of the 2011 community team
just imagine if the rule wasn't there
the first thing your opponent will do before you start the match is offer you something in exchange for a win


I have sat down at a table many a time in the last 2 rounds of a tourney and been immediately offered a split, which is perfectly legal under the existing rule. I don't see the difference.
The difference between a split and a bribe is that with the split, they are not asking you to concede.  You offer the split, then if that's accepted or denied, the players can decide to play the game out, who concedes or intentionally draw.  The decisions are seperate.

Compare these situation:  
The opponent sits down and says "If you scoop, I'll split the prize with you"

The opponent sites down and says "Would you like to split?"  You accept.  They say "Ok, now, do you want to play this out?"

The first situation is a bribe because they are offering you something of value (half the prize) for conceding.  The second isn't because the discussion of splitting the prize and playing the match are seperate.

The difference between a split and a bribe is that with the split, they are not asking you to concede.  You offer the split, then if that's accepted or denied, the players can decide to play the game out, who concedes or intentionally draw.  The decisions are seperate.

Compare these situation:  
The opponent sits down and says "If you scoop, I'll split the prize with you"

The opponent sites down and says "Would you like to split?"  You accept.  They say "Ok, now, do you want to play this out?"

The first situation is a bribe because they are offering you something of value (half the prize) for conceding.  The second isn't because the discussion of splitting the prize and playing the match are seperate.



Sorry, but I don't think I can possibly agree that discussing the 2 subjects in tandem is unethical when discussing them in sequence is not. That's simply illogical. Either conceding for prize is unethical or it isn't. The order in which the terms are agreed upon is purely semantic.
Sorry, but I don't think I can possibly agree that discussing the 2 subjects in tandem is unethical when discussing them in sequence is not. That's simply illogical. Either conceding for prize is unethical or it isn't. The order in which the terms are agreed upon is purely semantic.

The choice of sharing prizes cannot determine the outcome of any game or match. MadAdmiral's second scenario was legal, because the players could have played the match out normally. No player was forced to concede or forced to draw.
@MadCow:  Why can't you agree with that?  What makes bribery unethical (and against the rules) is that you're using a reward to "force" a person into acting differently.  Obviously, discussing both a split and who concedes/draws fufills both conditions.

However, if you offer a split WITHOUT saying anything about the outcome of the match, then you've removed one half of the critical points of bribery.  You can't possibly say that it's unethical to sit down at a table and say "I would like to split the prizes with you, but still play the match out."

Likewise, if you agree to concede (for instance, the conceding player is locked into the Top 8 either way, the other needs a win), then both want to hedge their Top 8 results, a split can be agreed upon there as well.  This isn't unethical as the match result has already been decided before any discussion of the prize has taken place.

I would also like to point out that you clearly didn't understand what I was saying.  The fact that you said "conceding for prize" clearly indicates that.  No one in my situation could ever be considered conceding for the prize.  Here is an example of what I'm talking about:

Me:  "I would like to offer you a split."
You:  "Why?"
Me:  "We're both in the money, and one of us is making Top 8 regardless of what happens.  Half of a Top 8 share covers my expenses to get here.  I don't really care about coming out ahead, I just want to make sure I break even."
You:  "Ok, sounds reasonable.  I'll split."
Me:  *calls judge/TO over*  "My opponent and I have agreed to split our prizes."
Judge:  "Do you agree with that?"
You:  "Yes."
Judge:  "Ok."  *leaves to do some paperwork or whatever*
----------
Me:  "Alright, now here are the standings.  If we play, the loser misses Top 8, but the winner would be seeded highly.  If we draw, we're both in.  I would like to offer a draw so we can get some rest before the Top 8 begins."
You:  "Actually, I've got to meet someone in about an hour.  I didn't expect the tournament to be so big.  I'll just concede and get out of here."
Me:  "Ok.  Let's sign the match slip."

Now, anything below the line can be done.  You could say "I'd rather play it out and try to be the first seed."  Or you could say "I'll take the draw and see you in the Top 8."  It doesn't matter.  The result of the match had nothing to do with the actual prizes.
The rules say that agreeing upon a prize split cannot affect the outcome of the match, however MadCow21 brings up a good point. Without the loss of a prize at risk, your opponent is much more likely to concede and move on.

This is the sort of rules evasion that happens in real life politics, and Wizards would be wasting their energy trying to counter it.

If you offer your opponent a booster box to concede, you're doing something illegal. If you offer your opponent a split, thus giving up only a few packs, and he concedes to "save time," congratulations. You know how to manipulate the system.

How would anyone propose that we make a rule to avoid this sort of conduct? The situations in which cheating and bribery occurred differ from legitimate agreement only by the motives of the players. Clearly, it's unethical -- but how can we spot that it's being done?
The choice of sharing prizes cannot determine the outcome of any game or match.


That, my friend, is a false statement. The choice of sharing prizes can most certainly affect a player's subsequent decision that determines the outcome of the match. Pretending that a temporal seperation between the two discussions somehow makes them completely independent of one another is naive at best.

it cannot _directly_ influence the outcome of a game or match
proud member of the 2011 community team
just imagine if the rule wasn't there
the first thing your opponent will do before you start the match is offer you something in exchange for a win, maybe he wants the planeswalker points, maybe he wants the bragging rights of having been in the final (or even "won"), there are lots of reasons to win besides just the price which he will have to give away as bribes

that's not a scenario I'd enjoy
I'd rather just play for playing's sake and not being bribed or possibly bullied into conceding



On the other hand, that would certainly fit the flavor of a duel between Plansewalkers a lot better. I mean, I'd bet Nicol Bolas would be quite happy to offer you your pick of the minion's he's been collecting from Bant to get you out of his... what do you say for a dragon? Horns? Scales? 
It all boils down to a very simple question: where's the victim?

Bribery is a crime. In the realm of gameplay, it's a «very severe infraction». 
But for bribery to exist, there has to be a briber, a bribee AND a victim. (or more)

Briber and bribee are easy to identify: the two players reaching an agreement over the outcome of the game. 
(An agreement, mind you. If any kind of bullying or «forcing» were present, it would be a whole different situation. Let's keep focused.)

But WHO is the victim(s)?
If we cannot identify someone whose legitimate rights have been prejudiced, then there is no bribery, no crime.
...which would lead us back to enjoyment, which is the ONLY validation for that rule anyone of you provided yet!  
(when one weeds out the babbling)       





Perhaps the victims are all the other players? How so?
One player is gonna win, the other is gonna lose (or Draw);
what actual difference does it make for the others if they reached that result
by playing Magic or playing rock-paper-scissors? or by exchanging goods?
The end result is the same. 
(of course, some control-freaks might demand that they play out a game of Magic... should we care about those?) 
 


(I guess it might be related to the «ranking system», about which I'm afraid I know nothing...)



Again: no victim = no crime.

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

just imagine if the rule wasn't there
the first thing your opponent will do before you start the match is offer you something in exchange for a win, maybe he wants the planeswalker points, maybe he wants the bragging rights of having been in the final (or even "won"), there are lots of reasons to win besides just the price which he will have to give away as bribes


You know, I actually wouldn't terribly mind getting bribed into conceding all my matches. I could walk away from every prerelease with the product I opened, a fistful of Johnnylicious jank, and a pizza.

That said, much as my casual ass would enjoy this strange land, I can see why it would probably be terrible for people who actually play Magic for the competetive aspect.

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.
Wizards' reasoning for bribery being against the rules, from the IPG (emphasis mine):
Bribery and wagering disrupt the integrity of the tournament and are strictly forbidden.
Imagine a player who goes from tournament to tournament just buying wins. I mean, let's face it: There are a lot of local players who play at GPTs who don't intend to travel to the GP the event feeds, and are just playing because it's the local shop's event.

Say I run a shop. I bring some product with me. If first prize is a box + byes, and 2nd if half a box, I have no problem offering my finals opponent half a box to scoop to me. It'll just replace itself and then some, and I have 3 Byes for a GP. ...That's not very fun. Especially because it puts a player in a really bad state after the tournament if they turn down a bribe and end up losing. That sort of "peer pressure" should never be put on a player. The game and the prizes at stake are enough to think about.

Then, if you allow bribery you need to have a limit. What's to stop someone from gradually increasing the offer for a concession over the course of a match? I offer X at the start, you say no. Little later, I offer more.... And a little more... And keep trying to find an offer you eventually agree to... Would you really want to play against that?

And yes, there are ways around the rules. Like, the top 4 players can all decide they want to scoop to a player and have that player get fewer packs because they're getting the Byes, as long as they don't mention players specifically. All you have to do is agree to restructure the prize support so 1st gets the Byes and X packs, 2nd, 3rd, 4th get some number of packs, THEN officially decide what you will do with each individual match. So while a player can't actually say "I'll take like 10 packs and the Byes and you can all split the remaining 54" that player can say "why don't we restructure the prize pool so first place gets 10 packs and the Byes, and the other 3 each get 18?" ...and if all parties agree, we're good. If we don't have an agreement, we go straight to just playing the games.

Sean Stackhouse Level Two Judge (Yay!) Maine

«Working around the rules» is bad behavior; it is nothing more than abusing the system's imperfections.
Politicians do it all the time and that is why we can't throw them in jail, notwithstanding their numerous crimes.
The rules are written with an intent in mind, albeit they may be imperfectly written.
My hesitations are about the intent of the rule, not about the minutia of its wording,
nor about any «holes» that may have been overlooked.


@SeaDogsFan:
I have no idea what your last paragraph means.

What is «Byes»?
What is the «structure of prize support»?
What does «scoop to a player» means? 

It is perhaps my ignorance of those things that makes me unable to perceive what's wrong here.

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

@Chaikov:  I really, really wish you would format your posts in a normal manner.  Dear lord they're hard to read...

You also need to either learn the tournament language or stay away from commenting on posts about tournaments.  Everything you're asking about is very basic tournament terminology, regardless of the game or structure.

Byes are rounds you get a win for without playing.  Normally, they're given to the player doing the worst when there are an odd number of players.  However, certain events give byes to start the event to people who meet certain criteria.  Grand Prixs are well known for this, as players with X number of Planeswalker Points get X number of byes, winner of some events gets them, etc.  Grand Prix Trials are held specifically so that the winner of those tournament will receive 3 byes to start the next Grand Prix.  It's a big advantage because you get to show up to the site late, but still start with a 3-0 record.

The structure of prize support is how the prizes are handed out.  For example, if you're at a GPT, 1st place (i.e. the winner) gets the 3 byes and usually some amount of packs.  At my FLGS, GPTs are run like FNMs, so the prize support is 2 packs per player total, with 8-12 going to 1st place, 6-8 going to 2nd and the rest split among the Top 4/Top 8.  Restructing the support in the case where most of the Top 4/Top 8 aren't going to the actual GP usually means that the one person who is going gets the byes and everyone else splits the packs evenly.

"Scooping" is conceding.
Thanks MadAdmiral! I knew nothing of that!

What's wrong with my formating?
(I actually try to make my posts easier to read; I believe six-line uninterrupted paragraphs like yours should be avoided: pauses are required.)

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

"Scooping" is conceding.

Tell me again: how can conceding procure me some advantage?

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

Random italization, random <>ing, etc.  And my posts aren't uninterrupted.  There's spaces in there...

Conceding doesn't get you an advantage other than not wasting your time.  In the example of a GPT, if you have a Top 8 consisting of 7 players who can't go to the GP the trial is for, then it's not worth it to them to stick around for another 4-5 hours to try to win the tournament.  So they all concede to the player who is going to go.  The 7 players save their time, the player who cares about winning gets the byes and everyone goes home happy.  In this case, the prizes are usually restructed to be an even split among the 7 players so they don't feel the need to have to play it out for nothing.
Imagine a player who goes from tournament to tournament just buying wins. I mean, let's face it: There are a lot of local players who play at GPTs who don't intend to travel to the GP the event feeds, and are just playing because it's the local shop's event.


You know, if they bribe their way into the GP, I'm guessing the people there would be a lot less willing to take bribes, so the situation may resolve itself. And it's not like one has to take a bribe. I mean yeah allowing bribery would be terrible for the srsbsns scene and turn it into basically pay to win, but I think most people would be pretty happy with the arrangement. The briber gets to feed his ego by showing off his economic status and winning at childrens' card games, and the bribee gets a bunch of stuff for conceding a match s/he was mostly playing for fun anyway. I mean, I guess other people might be annoyed that their ranking is affected if it's one of those swiss things, which I guess is the best argument against it, but yeah.


What's wrong with my formating?
(I actually try to make my posts easier to read; I believe six-line uninterrupted paragraphs like yours should be avoided: pauses are required.)


I dunno, if I recall my years of book learnin' correctly, the proper length of a paragraph is actually six to eight sentences.

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.
What's wrong with my formating?

you make paragraphs shorter than the page width

proud member of the 2011 community team
Random italization, random <>ing, etc.  And my posts aren't uninterrupted.  There's spaces in there...

Verbal communication uses pauses, face mimics, posture, sound volume and voice's tones to add information to the verbatim. Written text is somewhat impaired in that field. Italization, line breaks and other indicators are used to compensate this deficiency... if not used randomly! Wink I have observed that a large number of people have difficulty identifying the crux of a phrase; I try and help them do that. Spaces are not enough. @RPJesus: just try it! Present one group with a six-line paragraph, have them read it, take it away and submit them to «text comprehension examination». Present another group with the same text, but with line break between each sentence. See the difference in results!
Conceding doesn't get you an advantage other than not wasting your time.

So, again, WHO's the victim? ...and is that victim prejudiced in any way other than «enjoying less fun»?

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

Isn't THIS better?:

Verbal communication uses pauses, face mimics, posture, sound volume and voice's tones
to add information to the verbatim. Written text is somewhat impaired in that field.

Italization, line breaks and other indicators are used to compensate this deficiency... if not used randomly! Wink 
I have observed that a large number of people have difficulty identifying the crux of a phrase;
I try and help them do that. Spaces are not enough.

@RPJesus: just try it!
Present one group with a six-line paragraph, have them read it, take it away
and submit them to «text comprehension examination».
Present another group with the same text, but with line break between each sentence.
See the difference in results!




Conceding doesn't get you an advantage other than not wasting your time.

So, again, WHO's the victim?
...and is that victim prejudiced in any way other than «enjoying less fun»?

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

Isn't THIS better?

nope
just add a line before @RPJesus in the previous post and you're set

proud member of the 2011 community team
Are you reading this on a computer screen or on some hand-held device?

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

27" computer screen
proud member of the 2011 community team
Well, I must admit I'm falling from my chair! I really believed my formating helped. In fact, I have trouble believing you! You haven't tried the «text comprehension examination» I proposed, haven't you?

(just can't help it: I was about to italisize the word tried) 
(even that last sentence makes no sense unless tried is somewhat emphasized!)
(and I did use «» around text comprehension examination; was I wrong?)  

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

So, again, WHO's the victim? ...and is that victim prejudiced in any way other than «enjoying less fun»?

Everyone else whose place in the standings is negatively affected for reasons that have nothing to do with Magic, for one.

You might also want to familiarize yourself with the concept of integrity. I have never seen anyone who (argued as if he or she) was so utterly tone-deaf on that subject. Ordinarily, even people who, in their actual actions, make it blatantly clear that they have none (note, I am NOT placing you in that category) still pay it lip-service.

Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011

(and I did use «» around text comprehension examination; was I wrong?)  

I don't know about "wrong", but non-standard at least. I've actually never seen that symbol outside of your posts, believe it or not.

Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011

@Chaikov:  I've also never seen the <> ever used before.  I find that it's extremely distracting and often makes me skip over everything you're saying entirely. 

The same for breaking up every line.  It actually decreases comprehension because it doesn't allow the reader to easily derive the context of the entire paragraph.  The second post you made is a lot better than the first, but you also didn't group the topics correctly in the first.  It's worse in the fact that you have randomly created new lines throughout the post.

As for "who's the victim", it really depends on the situation.  If we're talking about the GPT Top 8 example, there is no victim.  The players who didn't make Top 8 wouldn't have been in the prizes, so they aren't effected by the change to the prize structure.  If we're talking about a large tournament where a player actually bribes another to get into the Top 8, than any other player that had a chance to make the Top 8 if it weren't for the bride are the victims.


In my example of offering the split before talking about an ID or a concession, there is no victim because there is no impact to any one outside that game.

I think those symbols are used by the french (maybe others) instead of quotation marks.
All Generalizations are Bad
Sign In to post comments