712.3. Only control of the player changes. All objects are controlled by their normal controllers.
4.4 Triggered Abilities
Players are expected to remember their own triggered abilities; intentionally ignoring one is Cheating. Players are not required to point out the existence of triggered abilities that they do not control, though they may do so within a turn if they wish.
If I read the rules correctly, if I control a player (say with Mindslaver), it's still their responsibility to catch triggered abilities. So, it would be legal for me to attempt to chump-attack their Knight of Glory into my Hill Giant, unless they bring the exalted trigger to my attention. Is this correct?
If I read the rules correctly, if I control a player (say with Mindslaver), it's still their responsibility to catch triggered abilities. So, it would be legal for me to attempt to chump-attack their Knight of Glory into my Hill Giant, unless they bring the exalted trigger to my attention. Is this correct?
Well, it's legal for you to force your opponent to attack with their Knight of Glory. You can hope that they forget about the exalted trigger and block it with your Hill Giant, but if they remember the exalted trigger, your Giant is toast.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 2 Magic Judge
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
Well, it's legal for you to force your opponent to attack with their Knight of Glory. You can hope that they forget about the exalted trigger and block it with your Hill Giant, but if they remember the exalted trigger, your Giant is toast.
Is it correct in all instances that opponents are responsible for triggers they own, even when they are controlled by another player? I assume this means that this is assuming the controlling player is playing at a slow enough pace of play.
Well, you can always ask the person controlling you to step back to a point they blew through, just ask you can ask your opponent to move back to the beginning of combat if they suddenly tap all their creatures to attack. The MTR doesn't make allowances for one player controlling another, but it does require that both players maintain a clear game state.
Is it correct in all instances that opponents are responsible for triggers they own, even when they are controlled by another player? I assume this means that this is assuming the controlling player is playing at a slow enough pace of play.
Magic is not a game of reflexes, if one player is trying to rush things, you have every right to inturrupt him and say "Wait, after you declare my attackers my exalted triggers giving my creature +x/+x"
Well, you can always ask the person controlling you to step back to a point they blew through, just ask you can ask your opponent to move back to the beginning of combat if they suddenly tap all their creatures to attack. The MTR doesn't make allowances for one player controlling another, but it does require that both players maintain a clear game state.
But "asking your opponent to back up" during combat is really just you interrupting their proposed shortcut for priority passes. In this case, we would ACTUALLY be backing up the game, which should only be done by a judge, no? I think you guys are giving too much liberty to the players with these rules.
For example, opponent quickly draws cards off say a Divination, drawing and casting a Shock targeting a 1/1 creature equipped with Diviner's Wand. At this point, the player being controlled by Mindslaver notifies the player that the creature in question should have gotten +2/+2 until EOT from the Wand. Should players really be handling "backups" in these situations?
In a super official setting, probably not. However, if the first opponent is rushing, and admits to it it's completely fair for the players to back it up.
However: In an super official setting players are often very particular about announcing steps to avoid confusion.
Example: At prereleases I always announce moving between steps like "Moving to combat step" etc. Also worth noting, since Diviner's wand triggers, and shock is an instant the first player could be responding to the triggers, so that's somewhat of a poor example.
Edit: And the thread is getting somewhat derailed.
Basically: Players should always be giving their opponent at least a few seconds between moves to announce triggers, and if there is a dispute as to what should happen call a judge, but I think most players are reasonable about it.
In a super official setting, probably not. However, if the first opponent is rushing, and admits to it it's completely fair for the players to back it up.
However: In an super official setting players are often very particular about announcing steps to avoid confusion.
Example: At prereleases I always announce moving between steps like "Moving to combat step" etc. Also worth noting, since Diviner's wand triggers, and shock is an instant the first player could be responding to the triggers, so that's somewhat of a poor example.
Edit: And the thread is getting somewhat derailed.
Basically: Players should always be giving their opponent at least a few seconds between moves to announce triggers, and if there is a dispute as to what should happen call a judge, but I think most players are reasonable about it.
This thread is not getting derailed. There are SPECIFIC instances in the MTR where players are allowed to "rewind" the game, and they mainly have to do with interrupting proposed priority passes. At a competitive level, players shouldn't be rewinding the game without the approval of a judge of some kind; it's not under the MTR, and can lead to bigger problems of understanding happening due to "improper" rewinds.
Like I said, if there's a dispute regarding whether a "missed" trigger should be placed on a stack or if the game should be rewound to that point, call a judge. However, if both players can agree (as is perfectly reasonable in this case) to back up to the declare attackers step and allow exalted to occur, there is no need for a judge. Especially at basically anything at your local store and below levels.
At a competitive level both players need to be respecting each other, and the rules and if any dispute arises call a judge immediately It's literally the main thing they're there for: To make sure games progress properly and fairly.
In my opinion, I would not call a judge in the case given by the OP, because if the mindslaving player was rushing it, all you really should have to do is say "Hold up, before you declare blockers my exalted needs to trigger", even if they have already said "You attack with X i block with X", at which point you could resolve the exalted and move onto the declare blockers step.
And like I said, players at a competitive level should be giving their opponents ample time to announce triggers (rushing the game to try and make your opponent miss triggers on purpose like the OP purposed is poor sportsmanship to say the least).
I assume this means that this is assuming the controlling player is playing at a slow enough pace of play.
If you're rushing, your opponent has every right to stop you, and slow you down because you're attempting to move at a pace that isn't allowing him to maintain a clear idea of the game state.
In the example I provided, I don't think there is even any need to back up or put exalted on the stack. As long as my opponent reminds me that Hill Giant dies when I put his Knight of Glory in his graveyard, then the Exalted trigger wasn't forgotten.
In general though, I have heard of professional players deliberately increasing the pace of play to take their opponents out of their comfort zone. The MTR does say that players may gain an advantage by "greater awareness of the interactions in the current game state". So I don't believe it is scummy to attempt what I proposed (not that I've done it), though clearly if a player goes too fast and messes up the game state, they will start getting warnings for Failure to Maintain Game State. And the opponent will always have the right to slow things down to a reasonable pace.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If I read the rules correctly, if I control a player (say with Mindslaver), it's still their responsibility to catch triggered abilities. So, it would be legal for me to attempt to chump-attack their Knight of Glory into my Hill Giant, unless they bring the exalted trigger to my attention. Is this correct?
Well, it's legal for you to force your opponent to attack with their Knight of Glory. You can hope that they forget about the exalted trigger and block it with your Hill Giant, but if they remember the exalted trigger, your Giant is toast.
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
Is it correct in all instances that opponents are responsible for triggers they own, even when they are controlled by another player? I assume this means that this is assuming the controlling player is playing at a slow enough pace of play.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
Magic is not a game of reflexes, if one player is trying to rush things, you have every right to inturrupt him and say "Wait, after you declare my attackers my exalted triggers giving my creature +x/+x"
But "asking your opponent to back up" during combat is really just you interrupting their proposed shortcut for priority passes. In this case, we would ACTUALLY be backing up the game, which should only be done by a judge, no? I think you guys are giving too much liberty to the players with these rules.
For example, opponent quickly draws cards off say a Divination, drawing and casting a Shock targeting a 1/1 creature equipped with Diviner's Wand. At this point, the player being controlled by Mindslaver notifies the player that the creature in question should have gotten +2/+2 until EOT from the Wand. Should players really be handling "backups" in these situations?
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
However: In an super official setting players are often very particular about announcing steps to avoid confusion.
Example: At prereleases I always announce moving between steps like "Moving to combat step" etc. Also worth noting, since Diviner's wand triggers, and shock is an instant the first player could be responding to the triggers, so that's somewhat of a poor example.
Edit: And the thread is getting somewhat derailed.
Basically: Players should always be giving their opponent at least a few seconds between moves to announce triggers, and if there is a dispute as to what should happen call a judge, but I think most players are reasonable about it.
This thread is not getting derailed. There are SPECIFIC instances in the MTR where players are allowed to "rewind" the game, and they mainly have to do with interrupting proposed priority passes. At a competitive level, players shouldn't be rewinding the game without the approval of a judge of some kind; it's not under the MTR, and can lead to bigger problems of understanding happening due to "improper" rewinds.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
At a competitive level both players need to be respecting each other, and the rules and if any dispute arises call a judge immediately It's literally the main thing they're there for: To make sure games progress properly and fairly.
In my opinion, I would not call a judge in the case given by the OP, because if the mindslaving player was rushing it, all you really should have to do is say "Hold up, before you declare blockers my exalted needs to trigger", even if they have already said "You attack with X i block with X", at which point you could resolve the exalted and move onto the declare blockers step.
And like I said, players at a competitive level should be giving their opponents ample time to announce triggers (rushing the game to try and make your opponent miss triggers on purpose like the OP purposed is poor sportsmanship to say the least).
Edit:
going back to what you said here:
If you're rushing, your opponent has every right to stop you, and slow you down because you're attempting to move at a pace that isn't allowing him to maintain a clear idea of the game state.
In the example I provided, I don't think there is even any need to back up or put exalted on the stack. As long as my opponent reminds me that Hill Giant dies when I put his Knight of Glory in his graveyard, then the Exalted trigger wasn't forgotten.
In general though, I have heard of professional players deliberately increasing the pace of play to take their opponents out of their comfort zone. The MTR does say that players may gain an advantage by "greater awareness of the interactions in the current game state". So I don't believe it is scummy to attempt what I proposed (not that I've done it), though clearly if a player goes too fast and messes up the game state, they will start getting warnings for Failure to Maintain Game State. And the opponent will always have the right to slow things down to a reasonable pace.