|
5 months ago ::
Jan 01, 2013 - 6:30PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Sep 17, 2004
|
If player B understands that targets had not been declared, is he obligated to point that out?
He is obligated not to make that decision for the other player.
No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 02, 2013 - 1:12AM
#12
|
|
|
This thread, and your other thread on the Chandra's Fury  reminded me of a sitation I saw in the Modern portion of Pro Tour Return to Ravnica. Unfortunately, I forgot the names of the players, but one of them was a brit. We'll call him player A and his opponent Player B. The situation was as follows: Player A: Cast Kitchen Finks  Player B: Cast a counter spell that draws a card (can't remember the name, perhaps it was Cryptic Command it was Remand  ) Player A: Without saying a word taps for   , momentarily reveals Mana Leak  then snaps it back quickly as he realises his opponent has 3 untapped lands. Plyaer B: Called for a judge and says "He tapped the lands and I saw the spell" Player A: Agrees with the series of events The judges ruling was that the spell was cast. Player A wanted to then target his own Kitchen Finks , but the judge said that as no targets were announced, it was assumed to be the top object on the stack. Obviously, this is not exactly the same situation as either of your scenarios, but I think it gives an indication of how judges might rule given certain calls to make. There must be many more sitations on coverage and I'm sure if you watch regularly you will be able to build up a picture of the Pro scene and how things go down. Cheers
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 02, 2013 - 5:37AM
#13
|
|
|
LoveMonkey: Appreciate you posting actual judge calls. Very helpful to see their reasoning. This seems to support the 'when their is targeting confusion, assume most likely scenario'.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 02, 2013 - 6:02AM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2012
|
Lovemonkey: Where did you read/see that? Is it a 'report' or live coverage or...??
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 02, 2013 - 6:11AM
#15
|
|
|
I watched the match on youtube so I actually saw it happen. I will see if I can find the video again and post a link here. Cheers EDIT: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud1AdB5u9Tw Skip to 1:50:55 for the start of the game or 1:53:40 for the judges call. He left it revealed for a little longer than I remembered, but the situation is pretty much as I described.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 02, 2013 - 6:20AM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2012
|
No worries. I am not that concerned with that specific match, just wondered where to see things like that. Was it on some 'official' channel, or were you just looking for any MTG games?
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 02, 2013 - 6:47AM
#17
|
|
|
I just play these videos sometimes whilst I'm working and listen to the commentary. If something interesting happens I wind it back and see what was going on. It's from the Wizards youtube channel.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 02, 2013 - 7:04AM
#18
|
|
|
The judges ruling was that the spell was cast. Player A wanted to then target his own Kitchen Finks , but the judge said that as no targets were announced, it was assumed to be the top object on the stack. Obviously, this is not exactly the same situation as either of your scenarios, but I think it gives an indication of how judges might rule given certain calls to make. There must be many more situations on coverage and I'm sure if you watch regularly you will be able to build up a picture of the Pro scene and how things go down.
It is worthy of note that this is a assumed shortcut that is specifically outlined in the rules.
4.2 Tournament Shortcuts
[...]
Certain conventional tournament shortcuts used in Magic are detailed below. If a player wishes to deviate from these, he or she should be explicit about doing so.
[...]
• A player who casts a spell or activates an ability that targets an object on the stack is assumed to target the legal target closest to the top of the stack unless the player specifies otherwise.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 02, 2013 - 7:23AM
#19
|
|
|
MJWhitfield1 thanks for pointing that out
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 02, 2013 - 8:44AM
#20
|
Date Joined:
Nov 10, 2012
|
It's from the Wizards youtube channel.
Cheers
Cool, thanks
|
|
|
