Its quite the read, and seems pretty logical. I like some of the finer points. Like the GOST example, where your action, even if you forget the trigger, is assumed to be on the stack above the trigger before it resolves and doesn't block the trigger, no "GOTCHA"s to be had there. Enjoy the "you can't 'forget' your 2/1 has exalted, announce it as 2, then 'remember' and deal 3 after blockers are declared".
Its quite the read, and seems pretty logical. I like some of the finer points. Like the GOST example, where your action, even if you forget the trigger, is assumed to be on the stack above the trigger before it resolves and doesn't block the trigger, no "GOTCHA"s to be had there. Enjoy the "you can't 'forget' your 2/1 has exalted, announce it as 2, then 'remember' and deal 3 after blockers are declared".
The whole point of the policy is that once you've announced it as 2, you've demonstrated that you've missed the trigger. So that GOTCHA won't have the effect you intend.
I like how its worded in the update. I especially like the Geist example as I've had people get angry over that. (I never said "any blockers" in any case, just declared attackers and went to cast the instant.)
I really, really, really don't like the changes with Pyreheart Wolf type of trigger as it pertains to who is responsible for missing the trigger, and think it's an absolutely atrocious change. Mostly as it pertains to flashing in Restoration Angel / other creature with flash to block. Seems like it will open the doors to lots of "gotchas" where the opponent is now responsible for knowing his opponent's triggers even if the opponent doesn't.
At least the other way, the burden was on the controller of the trigger. Seems to contrast philosophically with the mindset of "players are responsible for their own triggers", and I see hard feelings all around with this. Honestly, I think the previous policy was a lot more fair than this one is, and I'm disappointed in the policy changes.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former Level 2 Judge (Retired / Renounced)
Went to a new shop from a friend's recommendation, DQ'ed for willful violation of CR 100.6b.
I really, really, really don't like the changes with Pyreheart Wolf type of trigger as it pertains to who is responsible for missing the trigger, and think it's an absolutely atrocious change. Mostly as it pertains to flashing in Restoration Angel / other creature with flash to block. Seems like it will open the doors to lots of "gotchas" where the opponent is now responsible for knowing his opponent's triggers even if the opponent doesn't.
At least the other way, the burden was on the controller of the trigger. Seems to contrast philosophically with the mindset of "players are responsible for their own triggers", and I see hard feelings all around with this. Honestly, I think the previous policy was a lot more fair than this one is, and I'm disappointed in the policy changes.
there's a difference between not being responsible for reminding of your opponents triggers, and being lazy and ignoring everything on your opponents side of the board. With Pyreheart Wolf, it was more an issue of rules sharking to effectively negate that entire ability, whether or not the controller was aware of the ability or not.
If you're flashing in a restoration angel to block pyreheart wolf, to me that shows a) you've never seen pyreheart wolf before, b) you're trying to see if you can circumvent the trigger and force a missed trigger, or c) You're not paying attention to the game state at all. Either way, I would consider the situation to be a play mistake on the restoration angel player's side
I really, really, really don't like the changes with Pyreheart Wolf type of trigger as it pertains to who is responsible for missing the trigger, and think it's an absolutely atrocious change. Mostly as it pertains to flashing in Restoration Angel / other creature with flash to block. Seems like it will open the doors to lots of "gotchas" where the opponent is now responsible for knowing his opponent's triggers even if the opponent doesn't.
At least the other way, the burden was on the controller of the trigger. Seems to contrast philosophically with the mindset of "players are responsible for their own triggers", and I see hard feelings all around with this. Honestly, I think the previous policy was a lot more fair than this one is, and I'm disappointed in the policy changes.
Dude, what? There were already lots of hard feelings because of the exact oppositie scenario happening. This clarifies and fixes the potential issue (Which really wouldn't have been an issue if the original rules had been clearer about delayed triggers). You were never supposed to be able to Resto on an empty board and block a Pyreheart Wolf because the opponent didn't announce the trigger. Toby himself said before that in that situation the proper resolution was allowing the Pyreheart player to then make an announcement about the trigger. This update is essentially clarifying and removing all the gotcha moments that were in the last set of trigger changes.
And both players should be keeping track of triggers. Every system ideally wants both players to be aware of triggers.
I still don't like how the expectation is that the opponent remembers, even when s/he actually forgets, and I feel it goes contrary to the stated policy objective of players being responsible for clear communication and for remembering their triggers.
Partly, I don't like how it's being announced like this out of the blue, and there's not much time for judges to actually learn all these changes in policy before they get implemented.
However, if the consensus is that people feel this is an improvement, I suppose I just get to grin and bear it, and/or withdraw from the tournament scene.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former Level 2 Judge (Retired / Renounced)
Went to a new shop from a friend's recommendation, DQ'ed for willful violation of CR 100.6b.
1. You never have to remind your opponent of a missed trigger, but you can if you would like to. Everyone likes this. No issues?
2. Triggers are not considered missed until they impact the game meaningfully. The exalted example I think showcases this brilliantly. You attack with an exalted dude: it is both players' responsibility to be aware of the game state and of the triggers. As an opponent, this eliminates the incentive to try to take advantage of potential missed triggers. You must assume the controller is aware of his trigger and intends to use it. If the 3/1 exalted attacks into a 1/4, the 1/4's controller must assume that blocking here is bad. If you aren't sure, ask. Why are you trying so hard to get that extra "sketchy" advantage? If you go for the block prepare to get blown out when the controller of the exalted creature moves to damage and assigns four to your dude. If you don't block and he says take 3, you got lucky.
3. Magic is a game of shortcuts and respect. No one wants to take forever, and if you assume your opponent is keeping track of his own stuff and stop going for the z-axis advantage everyone has more fun.
1. You never have to remind your opponent of a missed trigger, but you can if you would like to. Everyone likes this. No issues?
2. Triggers are not considered missed until they impact the game meaningfully. The exalted example I think showcases this brilliantly. You attack with an exalted dude: it is both players' responsibility to be aware of the game state and of the triggers. As an opponent, this eliminates the incentive to try to take advantage of potential missed triggers. You must assume the controller is aware of his trigger and intends to use it. If the 3/1 exalted attacks into a 1/4, the 1/4's controller must assume that blocking here is bad. If you aren't sure, ask. Why are you trying so hard to get that extra "sketchy" advantage? If you go for the block prepare to get blown out when the controller of the exalted creature moves to damage and assigns four to your dude. If you don't block and he says take 3, you got lucky.
1. I agree. No issues. If they don't draw off of Bob then you say nothing, unless it might kill them.
2. The correct play as the defender here is to ask how big the creature is after it has been declared as an attacker. If they say 3/1, the trigger is missed, you can block and kill it. If they say 4/2 then don't block.
As for Pyreheart Wolf, I like how it works here. If they declare his ability, you know they didn't miss it, it is assumed to be in effect the whole game. If they say nothing, you can attempt to block with 1 creature, at which point they can say, "No, he can only be blocked by 2 creatures." This demonstrates the trigger was not missed.
Overall very good changes to fix the trigger rule. I think they have it down pretty well now. Good Job WOTC
These are good changes. It essentially tells people to play with a little bit of common sense in regards to card triggers and their opponent's intentions.
Hey. Looks like most get the concept of what we're going for with these rules and support it. If you have questions comments etc. then ask me in thread or via PM.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DCI L3 Judge; Regional Coordinator, British Isles & South Africa
I run a Tumblr for Magic-related statistics, graphs, and quizzes. Come check it out!
Anyone know how this effects Thragtusk triggers? That was something I missed a few times at the GP I went to a few months ago (where, in fairness, they stressed that you had to declare everything).
It was my first major event, and the way I tended to play Thragtusk would be like: Cast -> swing with my team... then move to my life total and add the 5 life. Rather than Thragtusk -> immediately gain 5 life before doing anything else. I think the former is more intuitive and in this case it doesn't seem like the 5 life matters. But then... that begs the question, when is that trigger missed if it's not immediately? And the same goes for the 3/3 token although I missed that a lot less frequently.
Both Thragtusk triggers fall into the second category, triggers that do something visible upon resolution. If your Thragtusk enters the battlefield and then you do something you couldn't do with the lifegain trigger on the stack, such as attack, then you've missed it and won't gain life.
Sure, people complain about having to remind their opponent of triggers, although not of it happening on MODO. But if your opponent cast obliterate and put his enchantments in the bin...you'd have to tell them. Cards should do what they do.
Yeh that's an interesting question arska, the way tobi explains in his blog point to the opponent knowing the outcomes of their actions which moving to block in your scenario after your opponent doesnt declare their trigger the opponent doesn't know the outcome.
These changes are probably a step in the right direction, but there are still some issues.
1) The Pyreheart Wolf example. Unless the attacking player explicitly stated the trigger, the defending player to gain advantage should *always* try to block with a single creature (if beneficial), just to check if the opponent missed the trigger or not. It's absolutely safe under new rules.
2) It does weird things to OOOS, which is even stated in the rules. "The Out-of-Order Sequencing rules (MTR section 4.3) may also be applicable". "May", really? So may not, if I don't want?
Consider this situation:
"My turn, I draw a card and gain 3 life from Celestial Force"
"HAHA, new trigger rules say you missed it!"
It feels like these changes reinforce the legal ways of how to catch your opponent, especially now that these rules apply at Regular REL.
1) The Pyreheart Wolf example. Unless the attacking player explicitly stated the trigger, the defending player to gain advantage should *always* try to block with a single creature (if beneficial), just to check if the opponent missed the trigger or not. It's absolutely safe under new rules.
No, may not if you're not in an OOS situation. As stated by Toby: this is a reminder, OOS may always apply to every situation, but players (and some judges) tended to overlook it in Missed Triggers situations, so they decided to include a sentence about it.
Clear OOS situation: single block of legal actions resolved in the incorrect order without strategical advantage gained from it. Player 1 gets its 3 life.
Technically (and logically) yes, but new rules are contradictory on this, since missed triggers part clearly states that the trigger is missed, and the OOOS part has no defined override.
It's only an illegal action if the attacking player already shown awareness the existence of her trigger. It then become either a GPE-GRV or Cheating, and a judge needs to be involved.
If the attacking player didn't show awareness of the existence of the trigger yet, the defending players doesn't have to remind her about it. It's one of the pillars of the new policy: there is nothing illegal in not reminding your opponnent about her triggers.
If you try to block, attacking player have then her last chance to demonstrate awareness by preventing such blocks, and asking new blocks to be made according to her trigger. If she forgot and doesn't do so, her ability have been missed.
I understand the new policy. But this situation becomes a "Schrodinger's trigger" - you don't know if it's illegal or not until you try it. It's still a violation of Comprehensive rules, regardless of whether it's penalized by MTR. And I don't think that encouraging such "wrong, but safe" actions provides healthy gameplay.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/233
BGStandard Green AggroGB
UWRGModern Saheeli CobraGRWU
UBRGLegacy StormGRBU
Wizards Certified Rules Advisor
http://blogs.magicjudges.org/telliott/2013/02/03/missed-triggers-3-the-bonus-disc/
Best to read this one first as it's the commentary from the guy who wrote it. I hope the MTG writers read it before they jump to some conclusions like they did last time.
The whole point of the policy is that once you've announced it as 2, you've demonstrated that you've missed the trigger. So that GOTCHA won't have the effect you intend.
Over all, I dont see many issues with the update.
540 Peasant cube- Gold EditionSomething SpicyAt least the other way, the burden was on the controller of the trigger. Seems to contrast philosophically with the mindset of "players are responsible for their own triggers", and I see hard feelings all around with this. Honestly, I think the previous policy was a lot more fair than this one is, and I'm disappointed in the policy changes.
Went to a new shop from a friend's recommendation, DQ'ed for willful violation of CR 100.6b.
Have played duals? I have PucaPoints for them!
(Credit to DarkNightCavalier)
$tandard: Too poor.
Modern:
- GW Birthing Pod(?)
Legacy:
- UWR Delver
there's a difference between not being responsible for reminding of your opponents triggers, and being lazy and ignoring everything on your opponents side of the board. With Pyreheart Wolf, it was more an issue of rules sharking to effectively negate that entire ability, whether or not the controller was aware of the ability or not.
If you're flashing in a restoration angel to block pyreheart wolf, to me that shows a) you've never seen pyreheart wolf before, b) you're trying to see if you can circumvent the trigger and force a missed trigger, or c) You're not paying attention to the game state at all. Either way, I would consider the situation to be a play mistake on the restoration angel player's side
Modern: Jund Legacy: RUG Delver EDH: Captain Sisay
Dude, what? There were already lots of hard feelings because of the exact oppositie scenario happening. This clarifies and fixes the potential issue (Which really wouldn't have been an issue if the original rules had been clearer about delayed triggers). You were never supposed to be able to Resto on an empty board and block a Pyreheart Wolf because the opponent didn't announce the trigger. Toby himself said before that in that situation the proper resolution was allowing the Pyreheart player to then make an announcement about the trigger. This update is essentially clarifying and removing all the gotcha moments that were in the last set of trigger changes.
And both players should be keeping track of triggers. Every system ideally wants both players to be aware of triggers.
Partly, I don't like how it's being announced like this out of the blue, and there's not much time for judges to actually learn all these changes in policy before they get implemented.
However, if the consensus is that people feel this is an improvement, I suppose I just get to grin and bear it, and/or withdraw from the tournament scene.
Went to a new shop from a friend's recommendation, DQ'ed for willful violation of CR 100.6b.
Have played duals? I have PucaPoints for them!
(Credit to DarkNightCavalier)
$tandard: Too poor.
Modern:
- GW Birthing Pod(?)
Legacy:
- UWR Delver
1. You never have to remind your opponent of a missed trigger, but you can if you would like to. Everyone likes this. No issues?
2. Triggers are not considered missed until they impact the game meaningfully. The exalted example I think showcases this brilliantly. You attack with an exalted dude: it is both players' responsibility to be aware of the game state and of the triggers. As an opponent, this eliminates the incentive to try to take advantage of potential missed triggers. You must assume the controller is aware of his trigger and intends to use it. If the 3/1 exalted attacks into a 1/4, the 1/4's controller must assume that blocking here is bad. If you aren't sure, ask. Why are you trying so hard to get that extra "sketchy" advantage? If you go for the block prepare to get blown out when the controller of the exalted creature moves to damage and assigns four to your dude. If you don't block and he says take 3, you got lucky.
3. Magic is a game of shortcuts and respect. No one wants to take forever, and if you assume your opponent is keeping track of his own stuff and stop going for the z-axis advantage everyone has more fun.
1. I agree. No issues. If they don't draw off of Bob then you say nothing, unless it might kill them.
2. The correct play as the defender here is to ask how big the creature is after it has been declared as an attacker. If they say 3/1, the trigger is missed, you can block and kill it. If they say 4/2 then don't block.
As for Pyreheart Wolf, I like how it works here. If they declare his ability, you know they didn't miss it, it is assumed to be in effect the whole game. If they say nothing, you can attempt to block with 1 creature, at which point they can say, "No, he can only be blocked by 2 creatures." This demonstrates the trigger was not missed.
Overall very good changes to fix the trigger rule. I think they have it down pretty well now. Good Job WOTC
Level 1 Judge
WUBRG
I run a Tumblr for Magic-related statistics, graphs, and quizzes. Come check it out!
It was my first major event, and the way I tended to play Thragtusk would be like: Cast -> swing with my team... then move to my life total and add the 5 life. Rather than Thragtusk -> immediately gain 5 life before doing anything else. I think the former is more intuitive and in this case it doesn't seem like the 5 life matters. But then... that begs the question, when is that trigger missed if it's not immediately? And the same goes for the 3/3 token although I missed that a lot less frequently.
Sure, people complain about having to remind their opponent of triggers, although not of it happening on MODO. But if your opponent cast obliterate and put his enchantments in the bin...you'd have to tell them. Cards should do what they do.
Still, as I said, marked improvement.
1) The Pyreheart Wolf example. Unless the attacking player explicitly stated the trigger, the defending player to gain advantage should *always* try to block with a single creature (if beneficial), just to check if the opponent missed the trigger or not. It's absolutely safe under new rules.
2) It does weird things to OOOS, which is even stated in the rules. "The Out-of-Order Sequencing rules (MTR section 4.3) may also be applicable". "May", really? So may not, if I don't want?
Consider this situation:
"My turn, I draw a card and gain 3 life from Celestial Force"
"HAHA, new trigger rules say you missed it!"
It feels like these changes reinforce the legal ways of how to catch your opponent, especially now that these rules apply at Regular REL.
Why exactly is this an issue at all?
Why is encouraging players to try illegal actions is an issue?
Technically (and logically) yes, but new rules are contradictory on this, since missed triggers part clearly states that the trigger is missed, and the OOOS part has no defined override.
I understand the new policy. But this situation becomes a "Schrodinger's trigger" - you don't know if it's illegal or not until you try it. It's still a violation of Comprehensive rules, regardless of whether it's penalized by MTR. And I don't think that encouraging such "wrong, but safe" actions provides healthy gameplay.