The rules update in Core Set 2019 added detailed loop rules to the Magic Tournament Rules and added C.R. 720.1c to the comprehensive rules, which states that the Magic Tournament Rules take precedence whenever they "contradict [the] rules" "governing shortcuts and loops" "during a tournament".
However, the existing rules for shortcuts and loops (as they appear in C.R. 720.2 and what follows) remain in place unchanged.
The reason for making this particular change, as opposed to—
modifying the comprehensive rules' shortcut rules to be in line with those of the M.T.R., or
incorporating the M.T.R.'s rules governing shortcuts and loops by reference in the comprehensive rules, not just in tournaments but in all Magic games,
either of which I feel is more preferable, is supposedly that updating the shortcut rules in the comprehensive rules would not follow "formal logic".
Which goes back to what I vaguely recall is the real nature of the comprehensive rules: they exist largely for Magic Online's sake.
Is this (still) true, especially with the advent of MTG Arena?
In my opinion, "formal logic" is not a reason for not incorporating common and accepted Magic gameplay conventions into Magic's comprehensive rules — both in tournaments and otherwise.
Is "formal logic" also the same reason why, for example, unlike in the Magic Tournament Rules—
graveyards can't be reordered by any player under the comprehensive rules by default (instead of, say, the rules giving a positive list of cards that care about the order of cards in a graveyard) (C.R. 404.2),
nothing in the comprehensive rules explicitly allows players to reveal cards they're allowed to see, and
a player can choose a card name under the comprehensive rules only by, well, choosing a card name (C.R. 201.3) (as opposed to describing the card unambiguously as allowed by M.T.R. 3.6)?
graveyards can't be reordered by any player under the comprehensive rules by default (instead of, say, the rules giving a positive list of cards that care about the order of cards in a graveyard) (C.R. 404.2)
No, I'm pretty sure this is because when you're playing a format that has graveyard-order-matters cards in its card pool, you don't want to force players to reveal whether or not they are running any of those cards before the match begins. It only make sense to allow graveyard reordering if neither player is running any such cards, but revealing that to your opponent is unnecessarily revealing information when you can just disallow graveyard reordering in the first place.
nothing in the comprehensive rules explicitly allows players to reveal cards they're allowed to see, and
You mean e. g. a player is allowed to look at another player's hand and you argue they should be allowed to just reveal that card to a third player? Seems sketchy.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Planar Chaos was not a mistake neither was it random. You might want to look at it again.
[thread=239793][Game] Level Up - Creature[/thread]
nothing in the comprehensive rules explicitly allows players to reveal cards they're allowed to see, and
You mean e. g. a player is allowed to look at another player's hand and you argue they should be allowed to just reveal that card to a third player? Seems sketchy.
I mean as opposed to the Magic Tournament Rules, which say: "[P]layers may choose to reveal their hands or any other hidden information available to them, unless specifically prohibited by the rules. Players must not actively attempt to gain information hidden from them" (M.T.R. 3.12). Note that I use the word "reveal" within the meaning of C.R. 701.15, where it means to "show [a] card to all players" in the game, not necessarily outside that game, "for a brief time".
However, the existing rules for shortcuts and loops (as they appear in C.R. 720.2 and what follows) remain in place unchanged.
The reason for making this particular change, as opposed to—
either of which I feel is more preferable, is supposedly that updating the shortcut rules in the comprehensive rules would not follow "formal logic".
Which goes back to what I vaguely recall is the real nature of the comprehensive rules: they exist largely for Magic Online's sake.
Is this (still) true, especially with the advent of MTG Arena?
In my opinion, "formal logic" is not a reason for not incorporating common and accepted Magic gameplay conventions into Magic's comprehensive rules — both in tournaments and otherwise.
Is "formal logic" also the same reason why, for example, unlike in the Magic Tournament Rules—
EDIT (Jul. 18): Clarification.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
You mean e. g. a player is allowed to look at another player's hand and you argue they should be allowed to just reveal that card to a third player? Seems sketchy.
Finally a good white villain quote: "So, do I ever re-evaluate my life choices? Never, because I know what I'm doing is a righteous cause."
Factions: Sleeping
Remnants: Valheim
Legendary Journey: Heroes & Planeswalkers
Saga: Shards of Rabiah
Legends: The Elder Dragons
Read up on Red Flags & NWO