The story goes more or less like this:
We are in a 5-MAN EDH game, the Decks in this game are: Ezuri, Sharuum, Skullbriar, Uril and me playing Intet
We are at turn 4 where most of us where barely playing Spells or just getting our mana bases ready for later turns.
With the Help of some ramp provided via Exploration the Ezuri Player got a Immaculate Magistrate + Joraga Warcaller with 10 Counters on it, and attacked the Sharrum player getting him at 3 Lifes.
Sharuum player was annoyed and blamed us for not doing anything to stop that (Which most of us couldn't has we were tapped out.
The next turn was the Sharuum dude Playing Armaggedon and passing the turn. We were in shock most of us thought he was simply gonna *** or something to reset the field but didn't excpect MLD at that point as he basically made us lose to the Ezuri Deck as we couldn't do much from then on.
The thing that concerned me was, was this just a one time thing that he did in spite of what happenened to him? Was it right to take that "You fall with me" attitude just becuase we were unable to stop the ezuri deck in time?
How we as a group should take this kind of attitudes...
From the Sharuum players POV it makes good sense to let Ezuri win quickly, so you could all start a new game. His attitude might be wrong, but I totally understand that he want to end the game sooner then later when he have the option.
People like that are just spiteful poor MLD players who are the very reason people loathe it. Properly played, MLD is an avenue to a victory. If you have a good advantage and Armageddon, well played good sir, you deserve the win. Being spiteful like that would cause you to get kicked out of most playgroups though.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
This sounds like an all too common case of taking your ball and going home. Unfortunately, players with poor sportsmanship make plays like this. I think the best course of action is to talk to him and explain why what he did was not cool and why it was the wrong play. If it is a habitual thing from this player, then perhaps they are not a good fit for the group.
From the Sharuum players POV it makes good sense to let Ezuri win quickly, so you could all start a new game. His attitude might be wrong, but I totally understand that he want to end the game sooner then later when he have the option.
that may be true, but its no real excuse. i'm not sure how patient you peeps are on mtgs, but mine can be pretty low if a player continuously has a bad attitude, blames everyone else for their own problems, and does spite-MLD or spite-chaos for no reason beyond just spiting the table.
its not everyone else's responsibility to have removal for the sharuum player; the sharuum player should also be packing hate. if no one has the right spell, no one has the right spell, and the sharuum player needs to take the hit, and whip up some anti-ezuri sentiment around the table (or whatever else that would help him get back in the game).
i think we'd have normally just rolled-back the spite-armageddon and continue to play as if he scooped then and there. and even if we didn't/couldn't, we probably wouldn't invite him back for a game.
Well, I did say his attitude might be wrong. Sure if it's only out of spite, while blaming the others, I would be annoying by his play aswell (I would in any case:)). But I understand the play, and don't totally buy the argument about bad sportmanship. This is magic, not sport. We are mages(/real humans) and act acordingly.
Depends on how he was acting I guess, if it was spiteful and could possibly slow the game down then I'd be irked. If its a King making play then no I dont have an issue with it and have probably do something like it at some point. If it speeds up the game or hell the person I'm setting up hasn't won all night then I think its fine.
From the Sharuum players POV it makes good sense to let Ezuri win quickly, so you could all start a new game. His attitude might be wrong, but I totally understand that he want to end the game sooner then later when he have the option.
that may be true, but its no real excuse. i'm not sure how patient you peeps are on mtgs, but mine can be pretty low if a player continuously has a bad attitude, blames everyone else for their own problems, and does spite-MLD or spite-chaos for no reason beyond just spiting the table.
its not everyone else's responsibility to have removal for the sharuum player; the sharuum player should also be packing hate. if no one has the right spell, no one has the right spell, and the sharuum player needs to take the hit, and whip up some anti-ezuri sentiment around the table (or whatever else that would help him get back in the game).
i think we'd have normally just rolled-back the spite-armageddon and continue to play as if he scooped then and there. and even if we didn't/couldn't, we probably wouldn't invite him back for a game.
Now this I find childish I won't play with anyone who does things like this. Almost as bad as "you win will play for second" when I hear that my mouth says "thanks for the games" and the voice in my head says "not playing those little kids again"
I agree wholeheartedly with what Mox has said here. Retconning someone's plays or ignoring them is telling them that you don't have the respect for them as a human being to politely discuss your issues with their behavior. If you don't believe that a play should have been made, then telling that person your beliefs to their face is as far as you need to go. Either of the other moves are some of the rudest things you can do as a magic player (in my book) without breaking clear laws or moral boundaries.
Before we crucify this guy anymore let's consider the fact that we're hearing the story from one of the losers, who's very salty about the whole thing judging by his tone. All v. 1 gangbangs are all too common in this format and the only choices you have in that situation are scoop or go down swinging. Choosing the latter is a legitimate political decision, not only so you aren't twiddling your thumbs for half an hour but also to give the table pause before dogpiling you in the next game too.
"Just" hitting an open planeswalker with dorks or busting a mana rock doesn't register too high on players' radars until everyone has done it exclusively to you while someone else runs away with the game. Using a "power general" like Sharuum can paint the target on your head even if you're literally using a precon; it's happened to me using a copy of Built from Scratch that my opponents had watched me pull out of the box.
I'd talk it over with your group and actually decide how you as group feel about the behavior, and how you'll handle it in the future.
Personally, I'm not a fan of kingmaking. It'll make you a target in the next game we play as much as I can afford without letting someone else get out of hand (though it should be noted that as an aggro player, I typically don't have many ways to stop people from doing things like kingmaking other than attempting to kill them). My group feels similarly, for the most part. But, there are also groups where it's perfectly acceptable, and it's really going to depend on your group how you handle it going forward.
We've had stuff like this happen at my kitchen table a couple times. Usually it is done in a 'haha' sort of way, but we've had to pencil in a rule that there are no suicides allowed. You can't scoop unless all parties still in play agree, and you can't kill yourself to spite another player (unless we're playing hidden buddy or and it makes sense to kill yourself an another player to aid your teammate). It still happens from time to time but almost dead isn't dead so iron nut it up.
If someone plays a MLD card at any point of the game, and it is a legal card, what is the problem? He was going to die, and figured let the elves win round one so we can start a new game. If the rest of the table could not deal with the play, well tough.
So when the Brago player burst off to an explosive start and started multi-blinking Detention Sphere the entire table turned against him and burnt him out quickly.
He took great offense at this and started *****ing everyone else out in the chat. Then, instead of letting us complete the game without him, he decided to go 'idle'. This is the ultimate childish display of 'If I can't win, then none of you can.'
The way MTGO works is that if a player goes idle, they have the remainder of their clock time (which in this case was about 34 minutes) before they time out. What this player did was decide that we would all have to wait the full 34 minutes before being allowed to continue our game without him.
In paper magic there is an unspoken social contract where a playgroup can define what they believe to be acceptable or not acceptable. Each playgroup can work this in however they see fit. Just remember, next time you decide to play, you don't have to invite that guy to play with you. If he has a problem with that you can discuss it like adults and maybe he will agree with you, or maybe he won't and he will go somewhere else.
i hate MLD, but this case would make me just scoop and not play with him after that.
I had something the feels the same. Last thursday we were all stuck with a pillowfort played who had humility on the field. so non of us are doing anything. however, what ends up happening is interesting. The pillowfort payer scoops. Meaning humility deactivates. I have Chancellor of the Forge in my hand, more than enough mana to play him, Purphuros, god of the forgeKiki-jiki, mirror breaker and Seige-Gang Commander on the field. everyone is low life. Since it is my turn, i kiki seige gang and then play chancelor killing everyone. One player says "Oh with humility gone the game state changes too much" So he claims that there is no winner jut because he lost (Seriously a krosan grip on humility would have been no different)
so yea you always will get a sore loser. And some people handle it in a very bad way. such as this sharrum player.
same night i was having an issue getting my counterspells in my azami deck, was drawing into misdirection, twincasts, and my wizards, not getting my counter spells.
"Why aren't you countering that."
"I can't no counterspells in hand, I would be able to try drawing for one if YOU didn't kill azami."
Eh, it was a legal play. IMHO the consequences of legal, in game plays should be in game only. Pummel the crap out of him the next game if it annoyed you so much. But let him play the way he wants to play.
Its things like these that really boil me up. I am a huge advocate for MLD as a way to keep the format healthy from too many G/X decks that like to ramp a bit too hard. It allows the format to reset the cmc clock as I call it or basically how bomby the plays become. But when people MLD then scoop it bugs me but only if no one can win. Yes grindy games right after MLD are a bummer but if the play can maintain advantage sure use it but what the player in the OP did wasn't MLD then scoop, he played Kingmaker.
Kingmaker is my pet-peeve in Commander and I get why the OP is salty. But the fact that the OP blames the MLD for the loss is the thing that bugs me not the king making in this situation. If you blame a strategy for the loss not the players choice you are having an issue in assessing the problem. The MLD wasn't the problem here kingmaking is.
So to the OP, Please stop dragging MLD's name through the mud, the strategy didn't kill you the player did.
If someone plays a MLD card at any point of the game, and it is a legal card, what is the problem? He was going to die, and figured let the elves win round one so we can start a new game. If the rest of the table could not deal with the play, well tough.
Eh, it was a legal play. IMHO the consequences of legal, in game plays should be in game only. Pummel the crap out of him the next game if it annoyed you so much. But let him play the way he wants to play.
i personally don't have so much free time to play edh, and i'm sure many other people besides me feel the same way. if someone is going to come in and wreck a game out of spite or go kingmaking, it wastes everyone's time. MLD is fine, even if someone would play it at an inopportune time; we've all had derp moments before. but doing it to spite someone/everyone else is simply not ok.
i personally don't have so much free time to play edh, and i'm sure many other people besides me feel the same way. if someone is going to come in and wreck a game out of spite or go kingmaking, it wastes everyone's time. MLD is fine, even if someone would play it at an inopportune time; we've all had derp moments before. but doing it to spite someone/everyone else is simply not ok.
What's wrong with spite as a motivation for doing something in a game? There are some times when you are in a position you literally cannot win from. It sounds like Sharuum guy was in such a position. What do you use to inform your decisions when playing to win is no longer an option? I've certainly done the "from hell's heart I stab at thee" thing when someone is about to kill me, trying to help the other player(s) beat whoever beat me. Taking revenge on the other players is certainly an unusual decision, but once you start telling people how to play it's a slippery slope as far as I'm concerned. And hey, maybe Sharuum guy was just doing the only thing he could that would still have a significant impact on the game at that point. That's fine too, as far as I'm concerned.
he may want the game to end quicker, but the other peeps on the table might not have.
would you guys really not mind having someone armageddon the board in 'cuz someone on the table attacked him? its not like the guy who attacked him was any worse off since he already had a board position. he wasn't even trolling the guy who attacked him, he was trolling everyone else on the table. just 'cuz he didn't have much of a chance (not no chance) doesn't give him the right to spoil it for everyone else and waste their time.
and the way it sounded, he WASN'T out of the game, not yet at least. one player was quite far ahead, but there are other players in the game too. most of the time, players would try to rally support against the guy who got ahead, and usually pummel him to the ground before he takes the rest of the table out.
you guys don't think that it'd be a waste of your time? that game could have developed into something interesting, but it basically ended in the next couple of turns after that (if the others didn't concede before that point). in a weird way, i think its commendable to have such a thick skin when it comes to dealing with people that i wouldnt want in my playgroup; i'd just ask you guys not to be actively encouraging these people to pull off the 'spite-the-table' splashy effect then quit.
you guys don't think that it'd be a waste of your time? that game could have developed into something interesting, but it basically ended in the next couple of turns after that (if the others didn't concede before that point). in a weird way, i think its commendable to have such a thick skin when it comes to dealing with people that i wouldnt want in my playgroup; i'd just ask you guys not to be actively encouraging these people to pull off the 'spite-the-table' splashy effect then quit.
But the game didn't. No one at the table could contain the Elf. So, the Sphinx did what he could. Sure the game could of developed into a memorable moment, but it didn't. It takes 4 to tango in EDH.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
We are in a 5-MAN EDH game, the Decks in this game are: Ezuri, Sharuum, Skullbriar, Uril and me playing Intet
We are at turn 4 where most of us where barely playing Spells or just getting our mana bases ready for later turns.
With the Help of some ramp provided via Exploration the Ezuri Player got a Immaculate Magistrate + Joraga Warcaller with 10 Counters on it, and attacked the Sharrum player getting him at 3 Lifes.
Sharuum player was annoyed and blamed us for not doing anything to stop that (Which most of us couldn't has we were tapped out.
The next turn was the Sharuum dude Playing Armaggedon and passing the turn. We were in shock most of us thought he was simply gonna *** or something to reset the field but didn't excpect MLD at that point as he basically made us lose to the Ezuri Deck as we couldn't do much from then on.
The thing that concerned me was, was this just a one time thing that he did in spite of what happenened to him? Was it right to take that "You fall with me" attitude just becuase we were unable to stop the ezuri deck in time?
How we as a group should take this kind of attitudes...
Discuss
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Damia http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=410191
DDFT Legacyhttp://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=505247
Domain Zoo http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=10212429#post10212429
that may be true, but its no real excuse. i'm not sure how patient you peeps are on mtgs, but mine can be pretty low if a player continuously has a bad attitude, blames everyone else for their own problems, and does spite-MLD or spite-chaos for no reason beyond just spiting the table.
its not everyone else's responsibility to have removal for the sharuum player; the sharuum player should also be packing hate. if no one has the right spell, no one has the right spell, and the sharuum player needs to take the hit, and whip up some anti-ezuri sentiment around the table (or whatever else that would help him get back in the game).
i think we'd have normally just rolled-back the spite-armageddon and continue to play as if he scooped then and there. and even if we didn't/couldn't, we probably wouldn't invite him back for a game.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
Horde of Notions
Now this I find childish I won't play with anyone who does things like this. Almost as bad as "you win will play for second" when I hear that my mouth says "thanks for the games" and the voice in my head says "not playing those little kids again"
Damia http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=410191
DDFT Legacyhttp://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=505247
Domain Zoo http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=10212429#post10212429
"Just" hitting an open planeswalker with dorks or busting a mana rock doesn't register too high on players' radars until everyone has done it exclusively to you while someone else runs away with the game. Using a "power general" like Sharuum can paint the target on your head even if you're literally using a precon; it's happened to me using a copy of Built from Scratch that my opponents had watched me pull out of the box.
Pauper: Burn
Modern: Burn
Legacy: Burn
EDH: Marath, Will of the Wild - Ramp/Combo | Anafenza the Foremost - French | Uril, the Miststalker - Voltron | Freyalise, Llanowar's Fury - Goodstuff
Ghost Council of Orzhov - Tokens | Lazav, Dimir Mastermind - Control | Isamaru, Hound of Konda - Tiny Leaders
Personally, I'm not a fan of kingmaking. It'll make you a target in the next game we play as much as I can afford without letting someone else get out of hand (though it should be noted that as an aggro player, I typically don't have many ways to stop people from doing things like kingmaking other than attempting to kill them). My group feels similarly, for the most part. But, there are also groups where it's perfectly acceptable, and it's really going to depend on your group how you handle it going forward.
My Helpdesk
[Pr] Marath | [Pr] Lovisa | Jodah | Saskia | Najeela | Yisan | Lord Windgrace | Atraxa | Meren | Gisa and Geralf
You play to win the game.
/eject playername
Damia http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=410191
DDFT Legacyhttp://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=505247
Domain Zoo http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=10212429#post10212429
Yep. If all other players do this you boot them from the game.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
I had something the feels the same. Last thursday we were all stuck with a pillowfort played who had humility on the field. so non of us are doing anything. however, what ends up happening is interesting. The pillowfort payer scoops. Meaning humility deactivates. I have Chancellor of the Forge in my hand, more than enough mana to play him, Purphuros, god of the forge Kiki-jiki, mirror breaker and Seige-Gang Commander on the field. everyone is low life. Since it is my turn, i kiki seige gang and then play chancelor killing everyone. One player says "Oh with humility gone the game state changes too much" So he claims that there is no winner jut because he lost (Seriously a krosan grip on humility would have been no different)
so yea you always will get a sore loser. And some people handle it in a very bad way. such as this sharrum player.
same night i was having an issue getting my counterspells in my azami deck, was drawing into misdirection, twincasts, and my wizards, not getting my counter spells.
"Why aren't you countering that."
"I can't no counterspells in hand, I would be able to try drawing for one if YOU didn't kill azami."
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
(U/B)(U/B)(U/B) JUMP IN THE LINE, ROCK YOUR BODY IN TIME
(R/W)(R/W)(R/W) RISING FROM THE NEON GLOOM, SHINING LIKE A CRAZY MOON
(U/R)(R/G)(G/U) STEALIN' WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUYIN'
Kingmaker is my pet-peeve in Commander and I get why the OP is salty. But the fact that the OP blames the MLD for the loss is the thing that bugs me not the king making in this situation. If you blame a strategy for the loss not the players choice you are having an issue in assessing the problem. The MLD wasn't the problem here kingmaking is.
So to the OP, Please stop dragging MLD's name through the mud, the strategy didn't kill you the player did.
i personally don't have so much free time to play edh, and i'm sure many other people besides me feel the same way. if someone is going to come in and wreck a game out of spite or go kingmaking, it wastes everyone's time. MLD is fine, even if someone would play it at an inopportune time; we've all had derp moments before. but doing it to spite someone/everyone else is simply not ok.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
would you guys really not mind having someone armageddon the board in 'cuz someone on the table attacked him? its not like the guy who attacked him was any worse off since he already had a board position. he wasn't even trolling the guy who attacked him, he was trolling everyone else on the table. just 'cuz he didn't have much of a chance (not no chance) doesn't give him the right to spoil it for everyone else and waste their time.
and the way it sounded, he WASN'T out of the game, not yet at least. one player was quite far ahead, but there are other players in the game too. most of the time, players would try to rally support against the guy who got ahead, and usually pummel him to the ground before he takes the rest of the table out.
you guys don't think that it'd be a waste of your time? that game could have developed into something interesting, but it basically ended in the next couple of turns after that (if the others didn't concede before that point). in a weird way, i think its commendable to have such a thick skin when it comes to dealing with people that i wouldnt want in my playgroup; i'd just ask you guys not to be actively encouraging these people to pull off the 'spite-the-table' splashy effect then quit.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
But the game didn't. No one at the table could contain the Elf. So, the Sphinx did what he could. Sure the game could of developed into a memorable moment, but it didn't. It takes 4 to tango in EDH.