|
3 months ago ::
Mar 05, 2013 - 9:31AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jul 15, 2011
|
so i'm pretty good at the Magic rules, but of course i didn't dive head-first into the Comp Rules to learn them :-)
i started out hearing things from my friends, and then looked at cranial insertion stuff, and lurked around here, and then did some more advanced rules stuff on the internet.
but is the only way to learn the tournament rules is to dive head first into one of the five (or so) official PDFs?
or is there, instead, some place that can give me an "overview" of the "more important" aspects of the tournament rules that i could learn, first?
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 05, 2013 - 9:44AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
I recommend you to read the tournament rules anyway. It's not that long. But here's a few basic things: -If you say "Okay", nod, or whatever that can imply that you pass priority, it's going to be interpreted as you passing priority. If you're holding a counterspell and your opponent casts a spell, consider if you want to respond before saying anything. -If there's an innocent tiny mistake that won't be interpreted as such (you draw before untapping your lands, you put a card from your hand onto the stack immediately realizing it's the wrong one, you drop a card from your graveyard), feel free to fix it. Tournament rules are harsh sometimes to avoid cheating or players gaining advantage, but otherwise let you breathe and play Magic just fine. -If there's something wrong with the game state and you both realized it late enough so that it has impacted the game, don't try to fix it. Instead, call a judge, explain the situation, and he will handle it. There's a general rule about not making you hold a decision if you thought the game state was different. For example, if you cast Duress  because your opponent has a card in hand, but then someone realizes that card shouldn't be there, you'd probably back up and you won't have to waste your card. Still, call a judge. -If there's anything you don't understand, or are not sure about card either player has, call a judge. Some people avoid this because they feel it's rude to contradict an opponent about his or her own card, but don't be afraid. Many players are patient. -Never accept anything from your opponent to modify the match's result. Never have that result be a random outcome (such as, "Time is over. How about rolling a die to see who wins?"). This includes forcing a tie so that you both divide up the prize for 1st and 2nd place. -If there's anything about tournament rules you don't know, ask a judge.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 05, 2013 - 9:49AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jul 15, 2011
|
Shiny_Umbreon, that's a start. thanks. although i must say that i see people in top places force a tie at FNM all the time, in order to split prizes. (maybe they're doing something else that i don't understand, though. i utterly terrible at actually playing Magic, so i am very, very rarely in such a position to do the same  )
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 05, 2013 - 10:28AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2009
|
although i must say that i see people in top places force a tie at FNM all the time, in order to split prizes.
Yeah Im not sure what hes talking about there. Splitting prizes is fine and so is ID'ing...
~ Tim
 Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D Sig
Show
That makes no sense to me.
If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed?
~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise  in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch  . YAY COLOR IDENTITY 
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 05, 2013 - 10:55AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
As far as I know, "splitting prizes" can be considered Bribery. (It is basically: "I offer you something of monetary value to alter the outcome of the match".) I know it's done often, but it shouldn't be.
Intentional drawing is fine. However, under that there is a 1st place and a 2nd place (determined by opponents' match wins), and prizes shouldn't be altered.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 05, 2013 - 12:27PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jan 23, 2007
|
My understanding is that an offer to spilt the prizes can be made separately from any discussion of match results. Combining the two is an offense. Drawing to lock up 1st and 2nd is completely okay.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 05, 2013 - 3:18PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jan 31, 2004
|
My understanding is that an offer to spilt the prizes can be made separately from any discussion of match results. Combining the two is an offense. Drawing to lock up 1st and 2nd is completely okay.
Sorry for taking this thread somewhat off-topic, I'm not really sure what you mean here. How can someone offer to split prizes at the start of a match and not discuss the match results as well, since those results would determine what prizes each player would get?
Also, it seems like a really hard rule to enforce, unless it's a very high level tournament. If the two highest ranked people are playing each other in the final round of an FNM, for example, no matter what happens, there will be the same amount of total prize distribution between the two players. If they both split the prizes, then each player would get an equal share and they would both be equally happy. If my opponent and I are both tired after a long day and don't want to play anymore, we could just split the prizes and be done with it. I don't understand why the rules have to be set up to disallow that, especially at the regular level.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 05, 2013 - 6:28PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Dec 29, 2010
|
My understanding is that an offer to spilt the prizes can be made separately from any discussion of match results. Combining the two is an offense. Drawing to lock up 1st and 2nd is completely okay.
Sorry for taking this thread somewhat off-topic, I'm not really sure what you mean here. How can someone offer to split prizes at the start of a match and not discuss the match results as well, since those results would determine what prizes each player would get?
Also, it seems like a really hard rule to enforce, unless it's a very high level tournament. If the two highest ranked people are playing each other in the final round of an FNM, for example, no matter what happens, there will be the same amount of total prize distribution between the two players. If they both split the prizes, then each player would get an equal share and they would both be equally happy. If my opponent and I are both tired after a long day and don't want to play anymore, we could just split the prizes and be done with it. I don't understand why the rules have to be set up to disallow that, especially at the regular level.
They aren't. That's completely legal. The only thing illegal is bribery.
"Can we agree that 1st place gets the points and second place gets the packs?
"Sure."
"Great; I concede." <--- Legal
"If you concede to me I'll give you the packs."
"Sure, I concede." <--- Illegal
It's straightforward. The two of you can come to any number of agreements (e.g. let's intentionally draw and split prizes evenly), but one of you can not offer the other person X in exchange for Y.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 05, 2013 - 6:59PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2009
|
From the rules document: Players are allowed to share prizes they have not yet received in the current tournament as they wish and may agree as such before or during their match, as long as any such sharing does not occur in exchange for any game or match result or the dropping of a player from the tournament. As an exception, players in the announced last round of the single-elimination portion of a tournament may agree to divide tournament prizes as they wish. In that case, one of the players at each table must agree to drop from the tournament. Players are then awarded prizes according to their resulting ranking. Such an agreement may never include a concession or an intentional draw.
Regular tournaments aren't single-elimination. And even then it's not an intentional draw.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Mar 05, 2013 - 7:31PM
#10
|
|
|
From the rules document:
Players are allowed to share prizes they have not yet received in the current tournament as they wish and may agree as such before or during their match, as long as any such sharing does not occur in exchange for any game or match result or the dropping of a player from the tournament. As an exception, players in the announced last round of the single-elimination portion of a tournament may agree to divide tournament prizes as they wish. In that case, one of the players at each table must agree to drop from the tournament. Players are then awarded prizes according to their resulting ranking. Such an agreement may never include a concession or an intentional draw.
Regular tournaments aren't single-elimination. And even then it's not an intentional draw.
Bolded the relevant part.
Players are allowed to decide to share prizes they have not yet received however they wish. Players are also allowed to turn in whatever match result they mutually agree on. This is true no matter what. What they cannot do is combine those two--they cannot share prizes in exchange for a given match result.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real.
--Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
|
|
|
~ 
~ 
~ 
~ 
