Last night I had this happen a couple times from several different people, and I wonder if it happens much for others.
Namely:
Someone has a very reasonable game action they could take (for example - using kaervek trigger to kill rafiq of the many when he casts specra ward on rafiq).
When deciding whether or not to take that action, they threaten "if you do that, I'm going to scoop".
generally-speaking, this isn't happening in a situation where they're definitely dead if I do X (which would obviously be reasonable, if pointless). They still had cards in hand, plenty of mana, etc. There's no reason to think they couldn't potentially come back, even if it's a major setback.
I experienced that as well, but not very often. Usually, the people who are doing exactly such a thing as you described are not really the ones I like to play with (they often whine about every decision against their board anyway 0_o). Hence my answer is usually a very clear "Well, then go ahead if you think that's the right move for you." - that usually makes them think about their decision again and the "problem" is solved.
@DirkGently: How did you respond to this situation you described? How did you "solve" it?
I’m a proponent of scooping at sorcery speed. I generally will not play with people who cannot abide by that if I can help it.
However, I do think there are times where the “nuclear option” must be invoked. For example, I was playing a U/G deck and had out creature Teferi, while being at about 12 life. The Godo deck had Helm of the Host on the stack, and I was the only person who could stop it. I had the counter in my hand, and said to my other opponents “I will stop this if you give me two untaps without killing me.” One player agreed immediately, but the other said he would not agree to that deal. I made sure he knew that the game would end if I didn’t counter the spell, which he said he knew. So I let the Helm resolve and we lost.
I think the difference between what I did and what you are describing is that I didn’t threaten to scoop if I didn’t get my 2 untaps. I threatened nonintervention where my inaction meant my opponents and I would assuredly lose. And since my opponent dared me to do it, I needed to show him that my words are more than wind. But again, I think there is a massive difference between meaning what you say politically in a game and rage-scooping to a Rest In Peace while playing Karador.
Yeah this kind of thing sucks. I was at low life, up against a guy with three or four 4/4 angel tokens just waiting for his turn to kill me. I draw Unflinching Courage and cast it on my 6/6 creature...since I had Rafiq of the Many out, this attack was going to gain me a ton of life.
I couldn't attack the angel token guy since he had Island Sanctuary out, so I look at my other opponent and say, "nothing personal but I need the life." He scoops on the attack so I deal no damage and get no life...I die on the other guy's turn. This kind of "tactical" scooping annoys me.
So, I definitely have seen some voltron decks scoop when you kill their general. I remember someone scooping to Song of the Dryads once. You know they have interaction to deal with it... they just feel like their whole game plane is ruined and that they cannot salvage a win. I think in that case I keep playing, but a lot of people scoop figuring they will not have fun sitting at the board not doing anything meaningful.
Yeah this kind of thing sucks. I was at low life, up against a guy with three or four 4/4 angel tokens just waiting for his turn to kill me. I draw Unflinching Courage and cast it on my 6/6 creature...since I had Rafiq of the Many out, this attack was going to gain me a ton of life.
I couldn't attack the angel token guy since he had Island Sanctuary out, so I look at my other opponent and say, "nothing personal but I need the life." He scoops on the attack so I deal no damage and get no life...I die on the other guy's turn. This kind of "tactical" scooping annoys me.
I would never play again with a person who scooped to stop me from gaining life. It is so petty.
It depends. If they scoop as OP described that’s on them. They aren’t out of the game. They’re just salty.
But if someone is scooping to prevent you from getting something then I usually look at the rest of the table and ask if we’re all cool with me proceeding as if the thing I was going to do happened. This means I get the benefit I was going to get (IE Lifelink or damage triggers) but I also wasted a turn attacking or casting a spell at a player who was technically already out of the game. This is why our league has a scooping at sorcery speed rule.
@DirkGently: How did you respond to this situation you described? How did you "solve" it?
So it happened twice, both *kind of* my problem.
First one was a guy playing pir + toothy, had pir out with a couple counters on him. I have Kaervek out and am doing my "he who casts the spell chooses the targets" thing, and I also have wound reflection out. Player 2 blows up all artifacts (which destroys a lot of my stuff, and pir+toothy players stuff) and swings at pir with a 12/12 while pir player is at 28. He doesn't block and takes a total of 24 after the wound reflection, which makes me think "ok, so he must be about to win the game with the pir, otherwise why would he go for 4 to avoid chumping, especially when I have kaervek on board?" Player 3 casts a spell, and I suggest targeting pir, and the pir player says "if you do that, I scoop". The guy chooses to target something else.
Obviously since I still do technically control the trigger, I could have targeted pir anyway, but I decided against it since (1) it breaks the kaervek rules I laid out, and (2) I figure almost anything pir player does will let me kill him or pir with kaervek anyway, so there's not that much actual risk.
On his turn, after assuring me he's not attacking me, he makes pir a 22/22, kills player 2, and suicides himself with his own ancient tomb.
So...I guess that worked out.
Second time was vs rakdos and rafiq. Rafiq casts the spectra ward. Rakdos looks pretty ahead, so I'm not against him having the spectra ward on the assumption that (1) he'll be using it to hurt rakdos, and (2) it'll take some heat off me (rakdos has mostly been hitting me up until this point, and pointing "his" kaervek triggers at rafiq player's face, rather than killing rafiq, which is...you know...a bad idea. But rules are rules. Anyway, so I'm ok-ish with the spectra ward but I want to make sure it's not coming at my face, so I ask him where rafiq will be attacking. He says he's not going to tell me. I say "if he's attacking me, I'm killing him with kaervek, and if you don't tell me I assume he's coming at me" to which the guy says he'll scoop if I target rafiq. I tell him all he has to do is not attack me, to which he eventually grumpily agrees. Kaervek targets rakdos, rafiq hits rakdos, on rafiq's next turn he plays finest hour, kills rakdos, and a few turns later manages to finish me off.
I think both cases went decently. Case 1 the guy totally kowtowed to his threat, but it didn't really matter, in fact it was good for both of us. Case 2 I stuck to my guns and got what I wanted, although obviously letting it resolve was risky. But as long as he wasn't immediately attacking me, I definitely had to let it resolve under the "rules" of Kaervek.
(You can read my kaervek thread if you want more explanation on the rules).
I’m a proponent of scooping at sorcery speed. I generally will not play with people who cannot abide by that if I can help it.
However, I do think there are times where the “nuclear option” must be invoked. For example, I was playing a U/G deck and had out creature Teferi, while being at about 12 life. The Godo deck had Helm of the Host on the stack, and I was the only person who could stop it. I had the counter in my hand, and said to my other opponents “I will stop this if you give me two untaps without killing me.” One player agreed immediately, but the other said he would not agree to that deal. I made sure he knew that the game would end if I didn’t counter the spell, which he said he knew. So I let the Helm resolve and we lost.
I think the difference between what I did and what you are describing is that I didn’t threaten to scoop if I didn’t get my 2 untaps. I threatened nonintervention where my inaction meant my opponents and I would assuredly lose. And since my opponent dared me to do it, I needed to show him that my words are more than wind. But again, I think there is a massive difference between meaning what you say politically in a game and rage-scooping to a Rest In Peace while playing Karador.
Yeah, I wouldn't fault you for that one at all. I think threatening concession is a viable option, especially if it's only a de facto concession, or a sorcery speed concession. In these cases, though, there wasn't much to be lost, at least on paper, from lettin them concede. Neither player was critically important to anyone else not losing the game.
Yeah this kind of thing sucks. I was at low life, up against a guy with three or four 4/4 angel tokens just waiting for his turn to kill me. I draw Unflinching Courage and cast it on my 6/6 creature...since I had Rafiq of the Many out, this attack was going to gain me a ton of life.
I couldn't attack the angel token guy since he had Island Sanctuary out, so I look at my other opponent and say, "nothing personal but I need the life." He scoops on the attack so I deal no damage and get no life...I die on the other guy's turn. This kind of "tactical" scooping annoys me.
I feel for you, but that's definitely a different scenario. In this case the player scooping had no real power over the people they were "threatening". The only threat seemed to be "if you do that, I'm going to have a bad time, so I'll try to make you feel bad for making me have a bad time".
I think threat-scooping is basically reasonable under these conditions:
1) you threaten the scoop before the critical decision has been made (so it's not just pure spite scooping - it's an attempt to change their actions, not just to hurt them).
2) the player you're threatening has another reasonable option (it's not really fair if they're guaranteed to be dead if they DON'T do the thing you're threatening to scoop over, then they're damned either way).
3) ideally, your group has approved strategic scooping in advance.
But in the cases above, none of this really makes sense because the player had no actual power, except the emotional power of "you're being mean so I'll make you feel like you're being mean". If they wanted to stay alive, all they had to do was say "I'll hit the other player for you if you don't hurt me". Which is a far preferable political maneuver than threat-scooping imo.
We have houserules in place for that stuff; you CAN scoop on instant-speed, but any effects that you "block" by this still go through, like, say, Firesong and Sunspeaker firing off a Blasphemous Act? He's still gonna get that 130 life from your 10 creatures.
Likewise if someone scoops due to such an action as described by OP, we let them, then let them know we don't do that around here, still have the effects count and move on. It's not that hard. People who do that kind of thing repeatedly find themselves without a playgroup soon enough.
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.
We have houserules in place for that stuff; you CAN scoop on instant-speed, but any effects that you "block" by this still go through, like, say, Firesong and Sunspeaker firing off a Blasphemous Act? He's still gonna get that 130 life from your 10 creatures.
Likewise if someone scoops due to such an action as described by OP, we let them, then let them know we don't do that around here, still have the effects count and move on. It's not that hard. People who do that kind of thing repeatedly find themselves without a playgroup soon enough.
Just to be clear - them scooping didn't prevent any triggers (I mean, technically it would have countered the kaervek trigger on resolution, but I wasn't gaining anything from it other than the effect of damage itself, which would have been rendered irrelevant no matter when they scooped).
It mostly seemed to be a move of "You're making me unhappy by targeting me, so my countermove is to try to make you feel guilty about how unhappy you're making me"
So, I definitely have seen some voltron decks scoop when you kill their general. I remember someone scooping to Song of the Dryads once. You know they have interaction to deal with it... they just feel like their whole game plane is ruined and that they cannot salvage a win. I think in that case I keep playing, but a lot of people scoop figuring they will not have fun sitting at the board not doing anything meaningful.
Yeah this kind of thing sucks. I was at low life, up against a guy with three or four 4/4 angel tokens just waiting for his turn to kill me. I draw Unflinching Courage and cast it on my 6/6 creature...since I had Rafiq of the Many out, this attack was going to gain me a ton of life.
I couldn't attack the angel token guy since he had Island Sanctuary out, so I look at my other opponent and say, "nothing personal but I need the life." He scoops on the attack so I deal no damage and get no life...I die on the other guy's turn. This kind of "tactical" scooping annoys me.
I would never play again with a person who scooped to stop me from gaining life. It is so petty.
Tactical scooping has been eliminated online. If you concede, the damage goes through, after taking into account all blocks that were made. Anything that would trigger, triggers.
I'm against implementing this IRL because there are scenarios where tactical scooping is appropriate, namely as punishment for breaking a promise. If you agree not to take me out in exchange for removing something that you can't deal with, especially if my doing what you want is what leaves me vulnerable to you, I will scoop out of spite. Dirty play begets dirty play, and I will let you know exactly why I did it and why you should have expected it. If your playgroup has people that regularly spite scoop just because, then it's something that should be implemented.
I do approve of it's implementation online though. Surprisingly, spite scooping wasn't that much of a problem, but it's annoying to have to spend time playing it out when you've lost because you have to wait on the table to click ok a bunch of times passing priority. Now you can just concede and get it over with without spiting the guy taking you down.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
I’m a proponent of scooping at sorcery speed. I generally will not play with people who cannot abide by that if I can help it.
However, I do think there are times where the “nuclear option” must be invoked. For example, I was playing a U/G deck and had out creature Teferi, while being at about 12 life. The Godo deck had Helm of the Host on the stack, and I was the only person who could stop it. I had the counter in my hand, and said to my other opponents “I will stop this if you give me two untaps without killing me.” One player agreed immediately, but the other said he would not agree to that deal. I made sure he knew that the game would end if I didn’t counter the spell, which he said he knew. So I let the Helm resolve and we lost.
I think the difference between what I did and what you are describing is that I didn’t threaten to scoop if I didn’t get my 2 untaps. I threatened nonintervention where my inaction meant my opponents and I would assuredly lose. And since my opponent dared me to do it, I needed to show him that my words are more than wind. But again, I think there is a massive difference between meaning what you say politically in a game and rage-scooping to a Rest In Peace while playing Karador.
This happens quite a lot, where if know that if you prevent one thing happening that you are 99% likely to hand the game over to the next person. You're in a losing position, so sure you can stop Player A, but then Player B wins. So you go to make a deal with the other players. I usually make my deals pretty reasonable, like "don't attack me for two turns". Honestly I can see that person calling your bluff on not stopping the other player, as not killing you for a couple of turns, they might have felt you could win through that deal. Probably should have come back with a one turn window instead.
I’m a proponent of scooping at sorcery speed. I generally will not play with people who cannot abide by that if I can help it.
However, I do think there are times where the “nuclear option” must be invoked. For example, I was playing a U/G deck and had out creature Teferi, while being at about 12 life. The Godo deck had Helm of the Host on the stack, and I was the only person who could stop it. I had the counter in my hand, and said to my other opponents “I will stop this if you give me two untaps without killing me.” One player agreed immediately, but the other said he would not agree to that deal. I made sure he knew that the game would end if I didn’t counter the spell, which he said he knew. So I let the Helm resolve and we lost.
I think the difference between what I did and what you are describing is that I didn’t threaten to scoop if I didn’t get my 2 untaps. I threatened nonintervention where my inaction meant my opponents and I would assuredly lose. And since my opponent dared me to do it, I needed to show him that my words are more than wind. But again, I think there is a massive difference between meaning what you say politically in a game and rage-scooping to a Rest In Peace while playing Karador.
This happens quite a lot, where if know that if you prevent one thing happening that you are 99% likely to hand the game over to the next person. You're in a losing position, so sure you can stop Player A, but then Player B wins. So you go to make a deal with the other players. I usually make my deals pretty reasonable, like "don't attack me for two turns". Honestly I can see that person calling your bluff on not stopping the other player, as not killing you for a couple of turns, they might have felt you could win through that deal. Probably should have come back with a one turn window instead.
I’m a proponent of scooping at sorcery speed. I generally will not play with people who cannot abide by that if I can help it.
However, I do think there are times where the “nuclear option” must be invoked. For example, I was playing a U/G deck and had out creature Teferi, while being at about 12 life. The Godo deck had Helm of the Host on the stack, and I was the only person who could stop it. I had the counter in my hand, and said to my other opponents “I will stop this if you give me two untaps without killing me.” One player agreed immediately, but the other said he would not agree to that deal. I made sure he knew that the game would end if I didn’t counter the spell, which he said he knew. So I let the Helm resolve and we lost.
I think the difference between what I did and what you are describing is that I didn’t threaten to scoop if I didn’t get my 2 untaps. I threatened nonintervention where my inaction meant my opponents and I would assuredly lose. And since my opponent dared me to do it, I needed to show him that my words are more than wind. But again, I think there is a massive difference between meaning what you say politically in a game and rage-scooping to a Rest In Peace while playing Karador.
This happens quite a lot, where if know that if you prevent one thing happening that you are 99% likely to hand the game over to the next person. You're in a losing position, so sure you can stop Player A, but then Player B wins. So you go to make a deal with the other players. I usually make my deals pretty reasonable, like "don't attack me for two turns". Honestly I can see that person calling your bluff on not stopping the other player, as not killing you for a couple of turns, they might have felt you could win through that deal. Probably should have come back with a one turn window instead.
I agree, but it was worth it when we played the next game. When I said “If you do this, I will do this” the table listened.
Sounds a lot more political to begin with than the locals at my gamestore, who are generally pretty low on the politics talk to begin with - what happens, happens and usually it's rather hard to sway anyone's decisions. Something something Finns.
So if this happened, I'd probably just give a shrug and "okay". It's just a game, last I checked.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
X Hope of Ghirapur Swordpile W Ghosty Blinky Anafenza U Nezahal- Big, Blue and HERE! B Gonti Can Afford It R Etali, Primal 'Whatjusthappened?' G Polukranos Wants More Mana WU The Exalted Vizier Temmet WB Home, Athreos WR Basandra, Recursive Aggression WG Karametra, Momma of Lands UB Wrexial Eats Your Brains UR Arjun, the Mad Flame UG The Fable of Prime Speaker BR Hellbent, Malfegor Style BG Jarad, Death is Served RG Running Thromok WUB Varina and ALL the Zombies WUBYennett, the Odd Pain-Train WUR Zedruu the Furyhearted WUG Arcades' Strategy, Shmategy, Sausage and Spam WBR A Case of Mathas' Persistent F*ckery WBRLicia's League of Legendary Lifegain Layabouts WBG The Karador Advantage PackageWRG Gahiji Rattlesnake Collection UBR Jeleva... does... things UBG Damia's Just Deserts URG Yasova's Has More Power Than Sense BRG Wasitora, Bad Kitty WUBRBreya, Eggs, Breya'd Eggs WUBG Tymna and Kydele, Extended Borrowing WURG Kynaios and Tiro, Landfall Impersonations WBRG Saskia Pet Card EnchantressUBRG Yidris of the Chi-Ting Corporation WUBRG Tazri's Amazing Allies
First one was a guy playing pir + toothy, had pir out with a couple counters on him. I have Kaervek out and am doing my "he who casts the spell chooses the targets" thing, and I also have wound reflection out. Player 2 blows up all artifacts (which destroys a lot of my stuff, and pir+toothy players stuff) and swings at pir with a 12/12 while pir player is at 28. He doesn't block and takes a total of 24 after the wound reflection, which makes me think "ok, so he must be about to win the game with the pir, otherwise why would he go for 4 to avoid chumping, especially when I have kaervek on board?" Player 3 casts a spell, and I suggest targeting pir, and the pir player says "if you do that, I scoop". The guy chooses to target something else.
I guess it was quite reasonable to assume that the Pir player was about to win and so targeting his Pir is certainly a play I would have made myself. But then, one cannot assume that others think the same way. Sometimes I let that much damage go through as well to simply smack someone with my general next turn, even though it's certainly not the smartest/best way I could have played (sometimes hitting some for "showing them the teeth you have" can be fun). But that's another topic, I guess. To me it seems that understanding his reaction would have solved the problem for later games. But then, many players I meet at the local store are not really there to talk and want to play the game they want to play (with their "rules" in mind). Maybe the Pir players has such an attitude as well?
He says he's not going to tell me.
He wanted to smack you ;). So your reaction was understandable and the correct political solution in that situation.
I think both cases went decently.
Yes, after reading your comment I thought exactly the same thing. Your reaction towards this (more or less) toxic play was good and you even play your Kaervek deck very player friendly.
I have an:
"If you play timesifter and I don't have an answer, I'm going to scoop and go do something else." rule for myself.
My decks are very low to the ground so global effects like that that hate on low CMC cards tend to disproportionately screw me over. Taking one turn for every 2 or 3 of the rest of the table doesn't appeal to me, so I go do something else.
I think in general, especially the older and more responsibility constrained we get, the more there is a need to take care of how you spend your time.
That said, having your general removed once while a busted enabler with it is on the stack is not where I personally draw the line It tends to be more along the lines of "someone armageddoned defensively and I don't have any lands in hand" type of scenario.
well, the only time i've ever experience this is when it's a near-hard lock, and everyone else on the table agrees that it's basically game over, or if someone needs to go early. That situation in the OP sounds a bit.. i don't wanna call it childish, but it's almost like that.
In games with a lot of "take that", you're going to have to "take it" sometimes. If someone at the table has bad/immature threat assessment skills for EDH, then it is what it is. If the table can't convince them with actual in-game relevant things and has to stoop to "stop hurting my feelings", it feels a bit like a game with direct confrontation and interaction isn't the sort of game for those people.
Unlike my group though, your group sounds like it's big enough to cater to sub-meta-pod groupings, where you can have individual tables where it's less ok to "pick on" players for doing well, and others where it's more acceptable. Or maybe i misunderstood something, somewhere.
Whenever it happens to me, I just say "Bye Felicia. And get your own damn weed!"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
You don't negotiate with terrorists for the simple reason that if you do it the first time then they'll do it again and the same concept applies here. The first time someone starts to threaten scooping early if you capitulate they gain an extra advantage in every game after that. Let them scoop and go on without them.
I am really bad at answering to threats: I am more likely to do something if someone treatens me not to. Each of the like 2-3 times people have been pulling this scoop threat, I have done what they wanted me not to (at least ones the guy did not even follow through).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Hail to the speaker, hail to the knower; joy to he who has understood, delight to they who have listened." - Odin
"Tactical scooping" just seems like a diplomatic way of saying "whiny temper tantrum." Scoop because you have to leave unexpectedly, not to deny someone value. I think it takes a petulant, childish turd to do something like that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can you name all of the creature types with at least 20 cards? Try my Sporcle Quiz! Last Updated: 6/29/20 (Core Set 2021).
How i feel about competitive players and casual players in EDH: The competitive are german tourists, the casual are italian tourists, both in a italian beach. The italians asking themselves "why are the germans here?" make a legitimate question, the answer is because the beach is beautiful, no matter the country you came from. The italians wanting to ban the germans are dumb, because if the germans pay for their stay and follow the rules like everyone else, they have the right to be in the beach. Hovewer, if the germans started to ask themselves "why are the italians here?"... they would be dumb as hell.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Namely:
Someone has a very reasonable game action they could take (for example - using kaervek trigger to kill rafiq of the many when he casts specra ward on rafiq).
When deciding whether or not to take that action, they threaten "if you do that, I'm going to scoop".
generally-speaking, this isn't happening in a situation where they're definitely dead if I do X (which would obviously be reasonable, if pointless). They still had cards in hand, plenty of mana, etc. There's no reason to think they couldn't potentially come back, even if it's a major setback.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Modern
URGTemur ScapeshiftGRU
EDH
WGKarametra EnchantressGW
UBGSidisi, Brood Tyrant ReanimatorGBU
UBRKess DoomsdayRBU
WBGGhave TokensGBW
WUBZur RebelsBUW
WUBErtai CursesBUW
WRFiresong and Sunspeaker Spell SlingerRW
[Primer] Erebos, God of the Dead
HONK HONK
@DirkGently: How did you respond to this situation you described? How did you "solve" it?
However, I do think there are times where the “nuclear option” must be invoked. For example, I was playing a U/G deck and had out creature Teferi, while being at about 12 life. The Godo deck had Helm of the Host on the stack, and I was the only person who could stop it. I had the counter in my hand, and said to my other opponents “I will stop this if you give me two untaps without killing me.” One player agreed immediately, but the other said he would not agree to that deal. I made sure he knew that the game would end if I didn’t counter the spell, which he said he knew. So I let the Helm resolve and we lost.
I think the difference between what I did and what you are describing is that I didn’t threaten to scoop if I didn’t get my 2 untaps. I threatened nonintervention where my inaction meant my opponents and I would assuredly lose. And since my opponent dared me to do it, I needed to show him that my words are more than wind. But again, I think there is a massive difference between meaning what you say politically in a game and rage-scooping to a Rest In Peace while playing Karador.
RBGLiving EndRBG
EDH
UFblthpU
BRXantchaRB
BGVarolzGB
URWZedruuWRU
I couldn't attack the angel token guy since he had Island Sanctuary out, so I look at my other opponent and say, "nothing personal but I need the life." He scoops on the attack so I deal no damage and get no life...I die on the other guy's turn. This kind of "tactical" scooping annoys me.
I say let them, but also that it is lame.
I would never play again with a person who scooped to stop me from gaining life. It is so petty.
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
But if someone is scooping to prevent you from getting something then I usually look at the rest of the table and ask if we’re all cool with me proceeding as if the thing I was going to do happened. This means I get the benefit I was going to get (IE Lifelink or damage triggers) but I also wasted a turn attacking or casting a spell at a player who was technically already out of the game. This is why our league has a scooping at sorcery speed rule.
First one was a guy playing pir + toothy, had pir out with a couple counters on him. I have Kaervek out and am doing my "he who casts the spell chooses the targets" thing, and I also have wound reflection out. Player 2 blows up all artifacts (which destroys a lot of my stuff, and pir+toothy players stuff) and swings at pir with a 12/12 while pir player is at 28. He doesn't block and takes a total of 24 after the wound reflection, which makes me think "ok, so he must be about to win the game with the pir, otherwise why would he go for 4 to avoid chumping, especially when I have kaervek on board?" Player 3 casts a spell, and I suggest targeting pir, and the pir player says "if you do that, I scoop". The guy chooses to target something else.
Obviously since I still do technically control the trigger, I could have targeted pir anyway, but I decided against it since (1) it breaks the kaervek rules I laid out, and (2) I figure almost anything pir player does will let me kill him or pir with kaervek anyway, so there's not that much actual risk.
On his turn, after assuring me he's not attacking me, he makes pir a 22/22, kills player 2, and suicides himself with his own ancient tomb.
So...I guess that worked out.
Second time was vs rakdos and rafiq. Rafiq casts the spectra ward. Rakdos looks pretty ahead, so I'm not against him having the spectra ward on the assumption that (1) he'll be using it to hurt rakdos, and (2) it'll take some heat off me (rakdos has mostly been hitting me up until this point, and pointing "his" kaervek triggers at rafiq player's face, rather than killing rafiq, which is...you know...a bad idea. But rules are rules. Anyway, so I'm ok-ish with the spectra ward but I want to make sure it's not coming at my face, so I ask him where rafiq will be attacking. He says he's not going to tell me. I say "if he's attacking me, I'm killing him with kaervek, and if you don't tell me I assume he's coming at me" to which the guy says he'll scoop if I target rafiq. I tell him all he has to do is not attack me, to which he eventually grumpily agrees. Kaervek targets rakdos, rafiq hits rakdos, on rafiq's next turn he plays finest hour, kills rakdos, and a few turns later manages to finish me off.
I think both cases went decently. Case 1 the guy totally kowtowed to his threat, but it didn't really matter, in fact it was good for both of us. Case 2 I stuck to my guns and got what I wanted, although obviously letting it resolve was risky. But as long as he wasn't immediately attacking me, I definitely had to let it resolve under the "rules" of Kaervek.
(You can read my kaervek thread if you want more explanation on the rules). Yeah, I wouldn't fault you for that one at all. I think threatening concession is a viable option, especially if it's only a de facto concession, or a sorcery speed concession. In these cases, though, there wasn't much to be lost, at least on paper, from lettin them concede. Neither player was critically important to anyone else not losing the game. I feel for you, but that's definitely a different scenario. In this case the player scooping had no real power over the people they were "threatening". The only threat seemed to be "if you do that, I'm going to have a bad time, so I'll try to make you feel bad for making me have a bad time".
I think threat-scooping is basically reasonable under these conditions:
1) you threaten the scoop before the critical decision has been made (so it's not just pure spite scooping - it's an attempt to change their actions, not just to hurt them).
2) the player you're threatening has another reasonable option (it's not really fair if they're guaranteed to be dead if they DON'T do the thing you're threatening to scoop over, then they're damned either way).
3) ideally, your group has approved strategic scooping in advance.
But in the cases above, none of this really makes sense because the player had no actual power, except the emotional power of "you're being mean so I'll make you feel like you're being mean". If they wanted to stay alive, all they had to do was say "I'll hit the other player for you if you don't hurt me". Which is a far preferable political maneuver than threat-scooping imo.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Likewise if someone scoops due to such an action as described by OP, we let them, then let them know we don't do that around here, still have the effects count and move on. It's not that hard. People who do that kind of thing repeatedly find themselves without a playgroup soon enough.
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.
It mostly seemed to be a move of "You're making me unhappy by targeting me, so my countermove is to try to make you feel guilty about how unhappy you're making me"
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Threatening to scoop because someone destroys one of your opponents, attacks you, or otherwise targets you is even more childish and unacceptable.
I still can't believe that people are that petty and get that salty over a card game.
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
Tactical scooping has been eliminated online. If you concede, the damage goes through, after taking into account all blocks that were made. Anything that would trigger, triggers.
I'm against implementing this IRL because there are scenarios where tactical scooping is appropriate, namely as punishment for breaking a promise. If you agree not to take me out in exchange for removing something that you can't deal with, especially if my doing what you want is what leaves me vulnerable to you, I will scoop out of spite. Dirty play begets dirty play, and I will let you know exactly why I did it and why you should have expected it. If your playgroup has people that regularly spite scoop just because, then it's something that should be implemented.
I do approve of it's implementation online though. Surprisingly, spite scooping wasn't that much of a problem, but it's annoying to have to spend time playing it out when you've lost because you have to wait on the table to click ok a bunch of times passing priority. Now you can just concede and get it over with without spiting the guy taking you down.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Niv-Mizzet Reborn
Feather, the Redeemed
Estrid, the Masked
Teshar
Tymna/Ravos
Najeela, Blade-Blossom
Firesong & Sunspeaker
Zur the Enchanter
Lazav, the Multifarious
Ishai+Reyhan
Click images for decks->
-Prime Speaker Vannifar
---------------------Will & Rowan Kenrith
Either way one has been eliminated, two left.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
I agree, but it was worth it when we played the next game. When I said “If you do this, I will do this” the table listened.
RBGLiving EndRBG
EDH
UFblthpU
BRXantchaRB
BGVarolzGB
URWZedruuWRU
So if this happened, I'd probably just give a shrug and "okay". It's just a game, last I checked.
He wanted to smack you ;). So your reaction was understandable and the correct political solution in that situation.
Yes, after reading your comment I thought exactly the same thing. Your reaction towards this (more or less) toxic play was good and you even play your Kaervek deck very player friendly.
"If you play timesifter and I don't have an answer, I'm going to scoop and go do something else." rule for myself.
My decks are very low to the ground so global effects like that that hate on low CMC cards tend to disproportionately screw me over. Taking one turn for every 2 or 3 of the rest of the table doesn't appeal to me, so I go do something else.
I think in general, especially the older and more responsibility constrained we get, the more there is a need to take care of how you spend your time.
That said, having your general removed once while a busted enabler with it is on the stack is not where I personally draw the line It tends to be more along the lines of "someone armageddoned defensively and I don't have any lands in hand" type of scenario.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
In games with a lot of "take that", you're going to have to "take it" sometimes. If someone at the table has bad/immature threat assessment skills for EDH, then it is what it is. If the table can't convince them with actual in-game relevant things and has to stoop to "stop hurting my feelings", it feels a bit like a game with direct confrontation and interaction isn't the sort of game for those people.
Unlike my group though, your group sounds like it's big enough to cater to sub-meta-pod groupings, where you can have individual tables where it's less ok to "pick on" players for doing well, and others where it's more acceptable. Or maybe i misunderstood something, somewhere.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
On phasing:
My 720 Peasant Cube