I have a jace, the mind sculptor in play at 3 loyalty and I am at 3 life. My opponent taps a red mana, puts a lightning bolt onto the table and says "bolt jace." I have a negate in my hand, but based on their announcement I say ok. My opponent then says I go to zero life and lose the game. To me this stinks of angle shooting so I'd like an actual ruling on how this would play out.
It is in the same vein of casting a cabal therapy and naming a card as you cast it which holds you to naming that card if the player you target has no response. However (as far as I know) if the target does something in response to the therapy the person casting it can choose a different card name.
So tl;dr: if my opponent says 'bolt your planes walker' are they held to redirecting the damage to it if I have no response? Are they held to their announcement if I do something in response?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
And on that day, Garfield said unto the world "Go ye forth and durdle!"
Your opponent has declared a legal shortcut: have Lightning Bolt deal 3 damage to Jace instead of to you (C.R. 306.7, 719.2a). When you accept thea shortcut, the actions called for in the shortcut will be taken (C.R. 720.2b-c) and every player will be bound to those actions. Note, however, that according to an official ruling from June 2013, in sanctioned tournaments the word "OK" doesn't automatically mean that the player saying it is allowing a spell to resolve (see also M.T.R. 4.2). Nevertheless, when another player proposes a legal shortcut, you must choose whether to accept or shorten it (C.R. 720.2b).
So tl;dr: if my opponent says 'bolt your planes walker' are they held to redirecting the damage to it if I have no response?
Hell, yes.
MAGIC: THE GATHERING® TOURNAMENT RULES
4.2 Tournament Shortcuts
Certain conventional tournament shortcuts used in Magic are detailed below. They define a default communication; if a player wishes to deviate from these, he or she should be explicit about doing so. Note that some of these are exceptions to the policy above in that they do cause non-explicit priority passes.
* A player who chooses an opponent’s planeswalker as the target of a spell or ability that cannot normally target a planeswalker is assumed to be targeting that opponent and redirecting the damage on resolution. The player must adhere to that choice unless an opponent responds.
Note that a player can "decline" a proposed shortcut only if he or she can show that the proposal is illegal. The proposal to have Lightning Bolt deal damage to Jace, however, is a valid shortcut proposal (see my comment 2; see also comment 10 of this thread). (Note that this can only be a shortcut proposal because Lightning Bolt can target only a "creature or player", not a noncreature planeswalker [C.R. 114.1a]).
EDIT (Apr. 27; May 8): Edited to conform to rule changes with Dominaria.
Since Lightning Bolt can now target a planeswalker as of Dominaria (C.R. 114.1a, 114.4), the opponent is now merely choosing to target Jace with Lightning Bolt (C.R. 601.2c), rather than declaring a shortcut, in this scenario.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It is in the same vein of casting a cabal therapy and naming a card as you cast it which holds you to naming that card if the player you target has no response. However (as far as I know) if the target does something in response to the therapy the person casting it can choose a different card name.
So tl;dr: if my opponent says 'bolt your planes walker' are they held to redirecting the damage to it if I have no response? Are they held to their announcement if I do something in response?
Your opponent has declared a legal shortcut: have Lightning Bolt deal 3 damage to Jace instead of to you (C.R. 306.7, 719.2a).When you acceptthea shortcut, the actions called for in the shortcut will be taken (C.R. 720.2b-c) and every player will be bound to those actions. Note, however, that according to an official ruling from June 2013, in sanctioned tournaments the word "OK" doesn't automatically mean that the player saying it is allowing a spell to resolve (see also M.T.R. 4.2). Nevertheless, when another player proposes a legal shortcut, you must choose whether to accept or shorten it (C.R. 720.2b).As regards Cabal Therapy, see also this thread.
EDIT (Apr. 27, 2018): Edited to conform to rule changes with Dominaria.
Hell, yes.
No, you
declinedshortened that shortcut.Edit: Changed "declined" to "shortened".
. The proposal to have Lightning Bolt deal damage to Jace, however, is a valid shortcut proposal(see my comment 2;see also comment 10 of this thread).(Note that this can only be a shortcut proposal because Lightning Bolt can target only a "creature or player", not a noncreature planeswalker [C.R. 114.1a]).EDIT (Apr. 27; May 8): Edited to conform to rule changes with Dominaria.