people who announce every little thing they are doing:
"I Untap my forests, I untap my Mountains and I untap my Swamps"
"Move to Upkeep, anything to declare? (Waits 5 seconds) Nothing?"
"Move to my Draw Phase. Draw my initial card for the turn"
"Move to first main phase. Play my first land for the turn."
ECT ECT I get it you're trying to make sure everything is by the books and announced and nothing is misplayed. But dude common you can skip some of that.
I say, "untap, upkeep, draw." quickly. Its mostly to encourage new players or sloppy players to see a pattern to the madness.
I do this, too. Partly to give people a chance to respond, and also to keep my own thoughts in order.
There's a guy at my shop who announces things like "I'll tap my temple for a blue mana, and this mountain for a red, etc." It's mildly frustrating to play against, but I can understand.
this is the last one that happened... i THINK it works as described, but please correct me if it doesn't work, so we won't get mashed by (at least this) weird chink in the rules: oblivion ring
Oblivion Ring ETBs and you chose to have it exile Permanent X.
Oblivion Ring’s ETB trigger targeting Permanent X
then, Erase it. Erase resolves and exiles O-Ring, putting its LTB trigger on the stack.
Oblivion Ring’s ETB trigger targeting Permanent X
Oblivion Ring’s LTB trigger
The LTB trigger resolves, but does nothing because O-Ring has not exiled anything yet.
Then the ETB trigger resolves, and Permanent X is exiled.
it sounds like it works rules-wise, but it is pretty unintuitive, and clearly not what wizards wanted it to work... and normally, we'd play it with the way we think wizards wanted o-ring to work.. but yea i dunno.. these kinda gimmicks really get to me.. is that weird?
That is how it works, and you're correct in that's not how Wizards wanted it to work, so they've begun using wording like you see on Banishing Light. Obviously, changing the older cards like Oblivion Ring would be power-level errata, though, so those aren't going away.
this is the last one that happened... i THINK it works as described, but please correct me if it doesn't work, so we won't get mashed by (at least this) weird chink in the rules: oblivion ring
Oblivion Ring ETBs and you chose to have it exile Permanent X.
Oblivion Ring’s ETB trigger targeting Permanent X
then, Erase it. Erase resolves and exiles O-Ring, putting its LTB trigger on the stack.
Oblivion Ring’s ETB trigger targeting Permanent X
Oblivion Ring’s LTB trigger
The LTB trigger resolves, but does nothing because O-Ring has not exiled anything yet.
Then the ETB trigger resolves, and Permanent X is exiled.
it sounds like it works rules-wise, but it is pretty unintuitive, and clearly not what wizards wanted it to work... and normally, we'd play it with the way we think wizards wanted o-ring to work.. but yea i dunno.. these kinda gimmicks really get to me.. is that weird?
That is how it works, and you're correct in that's not how Wizards wanted it to work, so they've begun using wording like you see on Banishing Light. Obviously, changing the older cards like Oblivion Ring would be power-level errata, though, so those aren't going away.
I am not sure that it is really "not as they intended". At first probably, but the ability pair was around as late as 2012 or so. Unfortunately, the cost of having the new intuitive ability is a significant loss of power. Why would I ever play Brain Maggot when I can just play Mesmeric Fiend and have more power? They will probably need to push the new version pretty hard for it to see play in Commander.
Anyway, I think Angel of Serenity was the last of those cards and I doubt they will ever be back. RIP trick exilers.
I kind of hate that most people tap their permanents correctly (clockwise), since I tap everything counterclockwise. I have no idea why I do that, but I have for 19 years, so I doubt I'll stop anytime soon.
I am not sure that it is really "not as they intended". At first probably, but the ability pair was around as late as 2012 or so. Unfortunately, the cost of having the new intuitive ability is a significant loss of power. Why would I ever play Brain Maggot when I can just play Mesmeric Fiend and have more power? They will probably need to push the new version pretty hard for it to see play in Commander.
To quote Matt Tabak in the M14 rules update bulletin:
This "stack loophole" was the worst kind of rules interaction. It baffled players and felt a lot like cheating. I know it has its fans, many of whom will tell you it was logical, derivable, and a wonderful example of the intricacies of the Magic rules and its many moving parts. And they're right, but it's also really bad when cards do something other than what they're advertised to do. Players shouldn't feel tricked by their beloved game.
This kind of effect, from Faceless Butcher to Oblivion Ring and even back to Oubliette in Arabian Nights, is designed to make a card go away temporarily, then bring it back later. That you could game the system to get rid of cards permanently is unintentional.
I'm not claiming that Banishing Light is a stronger card than Oblivion Ring, or that Banisher Priest is a stronger card than Fiend Hunter. They're not. The new effect is weaker, specifically because it doesn't let you game the system. But just because a developer know that there is a problem doesn't mean that they have a fix for the problem immediately available. Now they have a fix, and the old style is not going to come back.
I am not sure that it is really "not as they intended". At first probably, but the ability pair was around as late as 2012 or so. Unfortunately, the cost of having the new intuitive ability is a significant loss of power. Why would I ever play Brain Maggot when I can just play Mesmeric Fiend and have more power? They will probably need to push the new version pretty hard for it to see play in Commander.
To quote Matt Tabak in the M14 rules update bulletin:
This "stack loophole" was the worst kind of rules interaction. It baffled players and felt a lot like cheating. I know it has its fans, many of whom will tell you it was logical, derivable, and a wonderful example of the intricacies of the Magic rules and its many moving parts. And they're right, but it's also really bad when cards do something other than what they're advertised to do. Players shouldn't feel tricked by their beloved game.
This kind of effect, from Faceless Butcher to Oblivion Ring and even back to Oubliette in Arabian Nights, is designed to make a card go away temporarily, then bring it back later. That you could game the system to get rid of cards permanently is unintentional.
Well I guess that is that. Pretty surprising that it took them over 15 years to get it sorted out, especially since it was basically solved the same way as "Gain control of X as long as Y" which has also been around forever.
I kind of hate that most people tap their permanents correctly (clockwise), since I tap everything counterclockwise. I have no idea why I do that, but I have for 19 years, so I doubt I'll stop anytime soon.
Hey now, don't be hatin on my 'Depths! Ugh, you're probably one of those people that think ETBT lands are the devil, and you'd sooner play City of Brass than Temple of Enlightenment in a U/W multiplayer commander deck, like you're gonna use every mana every turn forever. That's fine, I'll just be over here saving money and only drawing the cards I want.
I kind of hate that most people tap their permanents correctly (clockwise), since I tap everything counterclockwise. I have no idea why I do that, but I have for 19 years, so I doubt I'll stop anytime soon.
Hey now, don't be hatin on my 'Depths! Ugh, you're probably one of those people that think ETBT lands are the devil, and you'd sooner play City of Brass than Temple of Enlightenment in a U/W multiplayer commander deck, like you're gonna use every mana every turn forever. That's fine, I'll just be over here saving money and only drawing the cards I want.
I do try to run a balance of ETBT lands, but I play a decent amount (and always play Temples, pretty much). My hatred for Depths is simply a reflection of my hatred for that type of effect; you just see your doom coming, and if you happen to not have a shuffle effect...ugh. It's a residue from playing it in Standard back in the day, likely, but I have tried it in EDH decks and wasn't wild about it, so...yeah.
Players changing their mind after announcing a play and someone responds. Honestly, I don't mind if someone says "Oops, I meant to play this land instead" when they see their mana doesn't work out quite right. But if someone responds to a spell, that's a completely different story.
I had Omnath out with 7 green floating (I use a die on top of him to track mana). Someone casts Toxic Deluge and says he pays 7 life for it. I say, "I respond be tapping my 6 Forests." He then changes the number from 7 to 13, proceeds to explain why he didn't actually cast it yet, etc. It's not my fault he didn't read the board state and see my untapped lands (I had a Seedborn Muse for crying out loud--he should have known). I let him get away with it, but it's pretty aggravating.
Any tips on how to avoid this? I think it would help to wait until mana (or creatures or whatever) is tapped, life is paid, etc. Then I should probably announce that I have a response. Then, when that is acknowledged, state I'm simply tapping my lands.
Players changing their mind after announcing a play and someone responds. Honestly, I don't mind if someone says "Oops, I meant to play this land instead" when they see their mana doesn't work out quite right. But if someone responds to a spell, that's a completely different story.
I had Omnath out with 7 green floating (I use a die on top of him to track mana). Someone casts Toxic Deluge and says he pays 7 life for it. I say, "I respond be tapping my 6 Forests." He then changes the number from 7 to 13, proceeds to explain why he didn't actually cast it yet, etc. It's not my fault he didn't read the board state and see my untapped lands (I had a Seedborn Muse for crying out loud--he should have known). I let him get away with it, but it's pretty aggravating.
Any tips on how to avoid this? I think it would help to wait until mana (or creatures or whatever) is tapped, life is paid, etc. Then I should probably announce that I have a response. Then, when that is acknowledged, state I'm simply tapping my lands.
In that situation, I would have formally gone through the passing of priority in order to give the caster a chance to change their mind. Once priority gets to me and the value of X still hasn't been changed, then I would respond. If they change X after that, it's too late and tell them they had ample time to fix their mistake.
When people play Halimar Depths on turn 1 when they can afford to save it for later. You are missing out on value!
I'm curious by this statement. I've always played it turn 1, even over ETBT lands like guild gates, just to ensure I hit more lands drops and/or to avoid top decking awkward late game cards. When do you feel is the ideal time to play it?
Only thing I hate is when someone takes a ton of turns or 15 minutes and not kill anyone. Honestly if you draw your deck or search 20 times in a turn and cant kill anyone please rethink your deck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hey guys so I've actually moved on from commander on to 60 card decks so I don't have any commander decks.
Anyway I've started my own gameplay channel in which I play games (Magic also)
Players changing their mind after announcing a play and someone responds. Honestly, I don't mind if someone says "Oops, I meant to play this land instead" when they see their mana doesn't work out quite right. But if someone responds to a spell, that's a completely different story.
I had Omnath out with 7 green floating (I use a die on top of him to track mana). Someone casts Toxic Deluge and says he pays 7 life for it. I say, "I respond be tapping my 6 Forests." He then changes the number from 7 to 13, proceeds to explain why he didn't actually cast it yet, etc. It's not my fault he didn't read the board state and see my untapped lands (I had a Seedborn Muse for crying out loud--he should have known). I let him get away with it, but it's pretty aggravating.
Any tips on how to avoid this? I think it would help to wait until mana (or creatures or whatever) is tapped, life is paid, etc. Then I should probably announce that I have a response. Then, when that is acknowledged, state I'm simply tapping my lands.
In that situation, I would have formally gone through the passing of priority in order to give the caster a chance to change their mind. Once priority gets to me and the value of X still hasn't been changed, then I would respond. If they change X after that, it's too late and tell them they had ample time to fix their mistake.
This can be difficult, because often my playgroup doesn't go through formal passing of priority. For example, one of the players may have already started scooping their creatures and tossing them into their graveyard. Then, if I were to say I have a response, they might say it's too late. Plus it can be really obvious when I say "I have a response" that I may be up to no good. He may have looked over at my board, saw my untapped lands, and decided to change to 13 before I stated what that response was. So I need to confirm that he actually announced and cast the spell, and chose X, before I even state that I have a response. What's a good way to do this? If players can be flippant with their actions, I basically have to ask, "Is that your final answer?" Help appreciated
The value of X is chosen when it's cast, so as soon as he says "Toxic Deluge for 7," it's too late for him to change it. If he just says "Toxic deluge," then just ask "for how much?"
When people play Halimar Depths on turn 1 when they can afford to save it for later. You are missing out on value!
I'm curious by this statement. I've always played it turn 1, even over ETBT lands like guild gates, just to ensure I hit more lands drops and/or to avoid top decking awkward late game cards. When do you feel is the ideal time to play it?
The ideal time to play Halimar Depths is as late as you can afford to. The same logic applies to Brainstorm in Legacy: The more information you have, the better decisions you can make. It also gives you more time to find a shuffle effect.
I do try to run a balance of ETBT lands, but I play a decent amount (and always play Temples, pretty much). My hatred for Depths is simply a reflection of my hatred for that type of effect; you just see your doom coming, and if you happen to not have a shuffle effect...ugh. It's a residue from playing it in Standard back in the day, likely, but I have tried it in EDH decks and wasn't wild about it, so...yeah.
Yeah, I was just giving you a hard time about it. Seeing your inevitable doom is a terrible feeling.
I do this, too. Partly to give people a chance to respond, and also to keep my own thoughts in order.
There's a guy at my shop who announces things like "I'll tap my temple for a blue mana, and this mountain for a red, etc." It's mildly frustrating to play against, but I can understand.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
I am not sure that it is really "not as they intended". At first probably, but the ability pair was around as late as 2012 or so. Unfortunately, the cost of having the new intuitive ability is a significant loss of power. Why would I ever play Brain Maggot when I can just play Mesmeric Fiend and have more power? They will probably need to push the new version pretty hard for it to see play in Commander.
Anyway, I think Angel of Serenity was the last of those cards and I doubt they will ever be back. RIP trick exilers.
Just that. I strongly dislike that card.
I kind of hate that most people tap their permanents correctly (clockwise), since I tap everything counterclockwise. I have no idea why I do that, but I have for 19 years, so I doubt I'll stop anytime soon.
This kind of effect, from Faceless Butcher to Oblivion Ring and even back to Oubliette in Arabian Nights, is designed to make a card go away temporarily, then bring it back later. That you could game the system to get rid of cards permanently is unintentional.
I'm not claiming that Banishing Light is a stronger card than Oblivion Ring, or that Banisher Priest is a stronger card than Fiend Hunter. They're not. The new effect is weaker, specifically because it doesn't let you game the system. But just because a developer know that there is a problem doesn't mean that they have a fix for the problem immediately available. Now they have a fix, and the old style is not going to come back.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Well I guess that is that. Pretty surprising that it took them over 15 years to get it sorted out, especially since it was basically solved the same way as "Gain control of X as long as Y" which has also been around forever.
Newsflash: Magic IS a game of skill.
I have gone 0-3 precisely zero times in my last 20 FNM drafts, while I have gone 3-0 eight times.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
I do try to run a balance of ETBT lands, but I play a decent amount (and always play Temples, pretty much). My hatred for Depths is simply a reflection of my hatred for that type of effect; you just see your doom coming, and if you happen to not have a shuffle effect...ugh. It's a residue from playing it in Standard back in the day, likely, but I have tried it in EDH decks and wasn't wild about it, so...yeah.
I had Omnath out with 7 green floating (I use a die on top of him to track mana). Someone casts Toxic Deluge and says he pays 7 life for it. I say, "I respond be tapping my 6 Forests." He then changes the number from 7 to 13, proceeds to explain why he didn't actually cast it yet, etc. It's not my fault he didn't read the board state and see my untapped lands (I had a Seedborn Muse for crying out loud--he should have known). I let him get away with it, but it's pretty aggravating.
Any tips on how to avoid this? I think it would help to wait until mana (or creatures or whatever) is tapped, life is paid, etc. Then I should probably announce that I have a response. Then, when that is acknowledged, state I'm simply tapping my lands.
In that situation, I would have formally gone through the passing of priority in order to give the caster a chance to change their mind. Once priority gets to me and the value of X still hasn't been changed, then I would respond. If they change X after that, it's too late and tell them they had ample time to fix their mistake.
Anyway I've started my own gameplay channel in which I play games (Magic also)
Twitch:
https://www.twitch.tv/dies_to_doom_blade
Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/user/UpsidedownHandshake
This can be difficult, because often my playgroup doesn't go through formal passing of priority. For example, one of the players may have already started scooping their creatures and tossing them into their graveyard. Then, if I were to say I have a response, they might say it's too late. Plus it can be really obvious when I say "I have a response" that I may be up to no good. He may have looked over at my board, saw my untapped lands, and decided to change to 13 before I stated what that response was. So I need to confirm that he actually announced and cast the spell, and chose X, before I even state that I have a response. What's a good way to do this? If players can be flippant with their actions, I basically have to ask, "Is that your final answer?" Help appreciated
Sometimes you just need the mana though...
Yeah, I was just giving you a hard time about it. Seeing your inevitable doom is a terrible feeling.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com