1. My opponent attack with Glorybringer and exert to my Glorybringer
Since glory only target a non-dragon, can my opponent change the target to my other creature?
2. My opponent has 8 land and cast Approach of the second sun tapping all his mana, i see him tapout i thought he don't have any mana left and cast Censor . Then my opponent count his land again and untap 1 since approach only cost 7 and pay for the censor. Is it alright? What is the infraction and how to handle this in competitive and reguler?
1. Since the ability can't target Dragons, targeting another Glorybringer (while it's a Dragon) is not allowed (C.R. 114.1d, 603.3d, 601.2c), so that action is reversed (C.R. 720.1) and your opponent must choose a non-Dragon creature you control as the target if possible.
2. Assuming for the sake of discussion that seven of the lands (not: mana) are Islands and one of them is a Plains:
If your opponent casts Approach of the Second Sun, your opponent will have U in the end. This is not enough to cast Censor; moreover, untapping an Island and tapping it again for mana will still result in U in the end. (Note that in a sanctioned tournament, here, tapping the eight lands for mana, casting Approach of the Second Sun, and untapping an Island has the same effect as tapping six Islands and one Plains and casting Approach of the Second Sun, so that this is merely a case of out-of-order sequencing under M.T.R. 4.3.) Therefore, attempting to cast Censor will be an illegal action (C.R. 601.2, 601.2h), so that action must be reversed (C.R. 720.1).
Both cases involve illegal actions; in sanctioned tournaments—
at Regular rules enforcement level, "usually the least disruptive option [to handle illegal actions] is to leave the game as is after fixing anything that is currently illegal" (such fixing, for example, includes putting Censor back where it formerly was for the second example) (J.A.R., "Common Issues").
at Competitive or Professional rules enforcement level, a judge may assess a Game Rule Violation against your opponent (I.P.G. 2.5). The first case involves only an illegal choice so the player involved must now make a legal choice (I.P.G. 2.5, "Additional Remedy").
EDIT: See comment 5; I misunderstood which player is attempting to cast Censor.
EDIT: Clarification after comment 11 was posted.
EDIT (Oct. 17): Edited.
If your opponent casts Approach of the Second Sun, your opponent will have U in his or her mana pool in the end. This is not enough to cast Censor; moreover, untapping an Island and tapping it again for mana will still result in U in the end. (Note that in a sanctioned tournament, here, tapping the eight lands for mana, casting Approach of the Second Sun, and untapping an Island has the same effect as tapping six Islands and one Plains and casting Approach of the Second Sun, so that this is merely a case of out-of-order sequencing under M.T.R. 4.3.) Therefore, attempting to cast Censor will be an illegal action (C.R. 601.2, 601.2h), so that action must be reversed (C.R. 720.1).
He is the one casting the Censor targeting Approach of the Second Sun.
Your opponent has the extra mana in his mana pool and can pay for Censor, nothing much you can do here. There's no infraction.EDIT: Thinking about it more and reading some, this is wrong.
The following rule was violated :
106.4a. If a player passes priority (see rule 116) while there is mana in his or her mana pool, that player announces what mana is there. If any mana remains in a player's mana pool after he or she spends mana to pay a cost, that player announces what mana is still there.
Albeit accidental, this creates a communication problem, and as a judge, I would allow Errua to go back in time before casting Censor. This situation is messy, because then the opponent knows about Censor, but I can't seem to find a better solution right now. I would be glad if another expert could chime in here. But if we go with that, at Competitive REL, I would definitely give a warning to Errua's opponent for Game Rule Violation. The fix wouldn't be different on Regular REL as I see it, and we don't give warnings at that REL, only game and match losses in very specific situations, and disqualifications for major issues like cheating.
I'm a former judge (lapsed), who keeps up to date on rules and policy. Keep in mind that judges' answers aren't necessarily more valid than those of people who aren't judges; what matters is we can quote the rules to back up our answers. When in doubt, ask for such quotes.
He is the one casting the Censor targeting Approach of the Second Sun.
Your opponent has the extra mana in his mana pool and can pay for Censor, nothing much you can do here. There's no infraction.
Which player is "he": Errua or the opponent? Comment 1 is vague on which player is casting Censor.
Errua is casting Censor on their opponent's Approach, we can surmise this by Errua talking about the opponent untapping one of their lands to pay for Censor (pay for Censor's effect), and that the possibility of the opponent casting Censor on their own Approach, with insufficient mana to boot, is highly unlikely.
EDIT : I edited my answer in post #3 and would like some help to resolve this.
I'm a former judge (lapsed), who keeps up to date on rules and policy. Keep in mind that judges' answers aren't necessarily more valid than those of people who aren't judges; what matters is we can quote the rules to back up our answers. When in doubt, ask for such quotes.
Is there any chance for a solution where the extra floating manna, having not been properly declared, would be lost and the censor would then counter the approach?
A fix that leaves the player responsible for the error better off seem less than ideal. I realize that if it's determined that such an error was committed intentionally there would be other consequences, but still.
Is there any chance for a solution where the extra floating manna, having not been properly declared, would be lost and the censor would then counter the approach?
A fix that leaves the player responsible for the error better off seem less than ideal. I realize that if it's determined that such an error was committed intentionally there would be other consequences, but still.
No, there is no scenario where the mana from the 8th land is lost and censor is able to counter the approach. The most favourable outcome to you is that the judge determines that a communication policy violation (where the player casting approach misrepresented free information), and that the judge would rewind the game state to the point where the error occurred, which would be with Approach of the Second Sun on the stack and 1 mana floating in your opponent’s mana pool.
As a note, in tournament play it is perfectly legal to tap 8 when you cast Approach and float a mana through its resolution to try to bait your opponent into casting censor. A violation only occurs if a player specially answers a question about free information incorrectly (such as making an incorrect statement about the amount of mana in his/her mana pool when asked).
Edit: as a note on rewinds and judge policies in general, as taking from the judge blog:
“It is a common misconception among newer judges to believe that the backup exists to move us from an unfair game state (any given error will normally give some advantage to one of the two players) to a fair game state. In fact, this is not our goal. Our goal is to make an incorrect game state into a correct one...” (source: https://blogs.magicjudges.org/articles/2013/08/20/backups-embracing-the-rewind/ )
Basically, whether or not something is fair, or who is responsible for an error, isn’t relevant to any game state decision a judge will make, only to penalty’s that a judge will issue.
As a note, in tournament play it is perfectly legal to tap 8 when you cast Approach and float a mana through its resolution to try to bait your opponent into casting censor. A violation only occurs if a player specially answers a question about free information incorrectly (such as making an incorrect statement about the amount of mana in his/her mana pool when asked).
Uh, that can't be right, can it? 106.4a seems pretty clear that unspent or floated manna is to be declared when passing priority or finishing casting a spell. If it's an accidental oversight or miscount fine, seek a remedy. If I know I'm floating manna or not spending all my mana when I cast a spell and then intentionally do not announce it in violation of 106.4a in order to try to gain an advantage in the game doesn't that have to be cheating?
As a note, in tournament play it is perfectly legal to tap 8 when you cast Approach and float a mana through its resolution to try to bait your opponent into casting censor. A violation only occurs if a player specially answers a question about free information incorrectly (such as making an incorrect statement about the amount of mana in his/her mana pool when asked).
Uh, that can't be right, can it? 106.4a seems pretty clear that unspent or floated manna is to be declared when passing priority or finishing casting a spell. If it's an accidental oversight or miscount fine, seek a remedy. If I know I'm floating manna or not spending all my mana when I cast a spell and then intentionally do not announce it in violation of 106.4a in order to try to gain an advantage in the game doesn't that have to be cheating?
You are correct, you can't secretly leave mana in your mana pool. If you over tap with the intent of tricking your opponent you are cheating. If you over tap because you miscounted, if it matters, it will almost always result in a back up to the point where the error was made, which is just before you pass priority with mana floating(your spell is on the stack, the mana is in your pool and you have priority).
1. Since the ability can't target Dragons, targeting another Glorybringer (while it's a Dragon) is not allowed (C.R. 114.1d, 603.3d, 601.2c), so that action is reversed (C.R. 720.1) and your opponent must choose a non-Dragon creature you control as the target.
To add to this response, on question 1--
The decision to exert and the choice of a target are separate actions. While you can reverse the choice of creature to a non-Dragon, if there are no other legal targets, the Glorybringer still exerts and no legal targets are chosen.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Since glory only target a non-dragon, can my opponent change the target to my other creature?
2. My opponent has 8 land and cast Approach of the second sun tapping all his mana, i see him tapout i thought he don't have any mana left and cast Censor . Then my opponent count his land again and untap 1 since approach only cost 7 and pay for the censor. Is it alright? What is the infraction and how to handle this in competitive and reguler?
2. Assuming for the sake of discussion that seven of the lands (not: mana) are Islands and one of them is a Plains:
If your opponent casts Approach of the Second Sun, your opponent will have U in the end.
This is not enough to cast Censor; moreover, untapping an Island and tapping it again for mana will still result in U in the end. (Note that in a sanctioned tournament, here, tapping the eight lands for mana, casting Approach of the Second Sun, and untapping an Island has the same effect as tapping six Islands and one Plains and casting Approach of the Second Sun, so that this is merely a case of out-of-order sequencing under M.T.R. 4.3.) Therefore, attempting to cast Censor will be an illegal action (C.R. 601.2, 601.2h), so that action must be reversed (C.R. 720.1).
- at Regular rules enforcement level, "usually the least disruptive option [to handle illegal actions] is to leave the game as is after fixing anything that is currently illegal" (such fixing, for example, includes putting Censor back where it formerly was for the second example) (J.A.R., "Common Issues").
- at Competitive or Professional rules enforcement level, a judge may assess a Game Rule Violation against your opponent (I.P.G. 2.5). The first case involves only an illegal choice so the player involved must now make a legal choice (I.P.G. 2.5, "Additional Remedy").
Both cases involve illegal actions; in sanctioned tournaments—
EDIT: See comment 5; I misunderstood which player is attempting to cast Censor.
EDIT: Clarification after comment 11 was posted.
EDIT (Oct. 17): Edited.
Your opponent has the extra mana in his mana pool and can pay for Censor, nothing much you can do here. There's no infraction.EDIT: Thinking about it more and reading some, this is wrong.The following rule was violated : Albeit accidental, this creates a communication problem, and as a judge, I would allow Errua to go back in time before casting Censor. This situation is messy, because then the opponent knows about Censor, but I can't seem to find a better solution right now. I would be glad if another expert could chime in here. But if we go with that, at Competitive REL, I would definitely give a warning to Errua's opponent for Game Rule Violation. The fix wouldn't be different on Regular REL as I see it, and we don't give warnings at that REL, only game and match losses in very specific situations, and disqualifications for major issues like cheating.
Which player is "he": Errua or the opponent? Comment 1 is vague on which player is attempting to cast Censor.EDIT (Oct. 17): Struck out.
EDIT : I edited my answer in post #3 and would like some help to resolve this.
A fix that leaves the player responsible for the error better off seem less than ideal. I realize that if it's determined that such an error was committed intentionally there would be other consequences, but still.
No, there is no scenario where the mana from the 8th land is lost and censor is able to counter the approach. The most favourable outcome to you is that the judge determines that a communication policy violation (where the player casting approach misrepresented free information), and that the judge would rewind the game state to the point where the error occurred, which would be with Approach of the Second Sun on the stack and 1 mana floating in your opponent’s mana pool.
As a note, in tournament play it is perfectly legal to tap 8 when you cast Approach and float a mana through its resolution to try to bait your opponent into casting censor. A violation only occurs if a player specially answers a question about free information incorrectly (such as making an incorrect statement about the amount of mana in his/her mana pool when asked).
Edit: as a note on rewinds and judge policies in general, as taking from the judge blog:
“It is a common misconception among newer judges to believe that the backup exists to move us from an unfair game state (any given error will normally give some advantage to one of the two players) to a fair game state. In fact, this is not our goal. Our goal is to make an incorrect game state into a correct one...” (source: https://blogs.magicjudges.org/articles/2013/08/20/backups-embracing-the-rewind/ )
Basically, whether or not something is fair, or who is responsible for an error, isn’t relevant to any game state decision a judge will make, only to penalty’s that a judge will issue.
Uh, that can't be right, can it? 106.4a seems pretty clear that unspent or floated manna is to be declared when passing priority or finishing casting a spell. If it's an accidental oversight or miscount fine, seek a remedy. If I know I'm floating manna or not spending all my mana when I cast a spell and then intentionally do not announce it in violation of 106.4a in order to try to gain an advantage in the game doesn't that have to be cheating?
To add to this response, on question 1--
The decision to exert and the choice of a target are separate actions. While you can reverse the choice of creature to a non-Dragon, if there are no other legal targets, the Glorybringer still exerts and no legal targets are chosen.