An opponent playing the card should respond with "no target", as the second mode does not have a target. Of course, this only comes up in the situation where they don't announce the mode and the opponent asks for target rather than mode (in perhaps an attempt to get this outcome of them discarding cards).
At regular REL, I think you let it slide. Even judges tend to downgrade penalties at regular REL, so it's not really worth calling a judge. At most, they get a warning and rewind to them casting it with the correct mode selected. If you're at Comp or higher, you call a judge and they probably enforce the only viable option, citing that a player should know how their card works. It can be a little bit scummy but when you're playing at a rules enforcement level where players are expected to know how their cards work, you should be enforcing that they do know. People always get mad at things like this or think you're scum, but it's always within your right to do so. You shouldn't be thinking that they're calling a judge to screw you, but that they're not sure what should happen (because honestly, you probably have resolved the card incorrectly at this point).
Modern has a lot of interactions people don't know very well, and Magic as a whole is confusing. You should always opt not to punish players, but at competitive events you need to uphold some of the game's integrity. Like if you ask for the target for Oblivion Ring, we're holding you to having let it resolve no matter what (they might even do this at regular REL as well). No player deserves to be punished except in the case they're intentionally doing bad things.
Since someone brought up Esper Charm I want the community's opinion on something (75% of you probably know where I am going with this).
Let's say you are playing against someone and they cast Esper Charm. You ask the question, "Are you targeting me, or targeting yourself?"
Your opponent replies, "I am targeting myself"
At FNM or another non-Comp REL event, do you just let it slide and let them draw 2 cards?
What about at a Comp REL event?
What about at a Pro REL event?
I'm asking because the last Comp REL even I went to this came up, and the guy called a Judge on his opponent for drawing instead of discarding. For the rest of the tournament, I noticed almost everyone who got paired against him had this, "Why did I have to get paired against the scumbag" attitude to them.
I feel Modern is, and always has been, a format where if you don't understand interactions like this you deserve to be punished for it. But what are everyone else's takes?
I know you didn't ask about regular or casual REL, but I'll give those as well.
Regular and Casual REL - you 100% let them take it back. Comp REL - technically, the play stands and he has to discard. It is rules lawyering, but it is within the rules. It's not going to keep the guy from looking like a scumbag to some. However, this may not be acknowledged as well - some people accept it and realize that they should be more careful. Pro REL - they 100% can do this. But there are a few things in play. Firstly, most players on the Pro Tour wouldn't make that type of mistake. They announce everything audibly or it is recognized between both players. It is very unlikely to happen at the Pro Level. You want to maintain some type of integrity at the higher levels (which is why players like Paul Rietzl are so admired), but they are playing for a BIG monetary prize, so often anything can go. As a Pro, it is a tough distinction between trying to accomplish something at any price or maintaining integrity and not being known as "that guy."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
The reason I asked specifically about Pro REL is because aren't GP Day 2's technically Pro REL level?
I didn't know that. I've played a lot of Day 2s at GPs and I didn't notice anything in the announcements that said so. Also I didn't "feel" it for what that's worth (obviously you can tell that Day 2s feel a lot more competitive and cutthroat, but I didn't feel it was Pro level). Admittedly I hadn't played in a GP for a long time before Vegas though, Day 2ing the Modern portion. The last GP I played before it was Vegas MM2015.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I'm pretty sure asking the question "are you targeting me, or targeting yourself" for Esper Charm is 'angle shooting', and highly questionable itself if not against the rules. There is almost no case where a player would target themselves with esper charm unless they misunderstand the draw affect to be targeting as well - one might reasonably infer as much from the question.
If a player did that and then called a judge, that player should be given a misconduct warning imo. Angle shooting is not cool.
Deserve to lose is a strong choice of words. For me games shouldn't be decided on some wording technicality where one person is obviously trying to manipulate the other into saying a specific phrase. Now there is a line to be drawn but it's very arbitrary. This specific instance to me isn't about someone not knowing how a card works but one not recognising what that they are being tricked into saying something. I also think they way we handle modal cards is dumb. The mode should be the first thing declared that way you avoid this nonsense
If a player says they are casting Esper Charm and your first question is "targeting me or you?" That's a blatant attempt at manipulation to me. If your game plan involves verbally tricking a player, even without any actual dishonesty, I take issue. I'm glad that the rules have been upgraded to include common sense dealings (as someone who was literally rules lawyer'ed at old school PTQs as a teenager. Yes, there used to only be PTQs).
That being said, one reason I love modern is that it contains a ton of complex interactions. I don't enjoy that because I like tricking people, but because this is a format that rewards extensive knowledge of dozens of archetypes and lines of play. It continues to make me laugh that some pros complain about modern because they want to have a very clear, established meta so that they can try to prepare the best deck. Seriously, Mengucci wrote about this yesterday for CFB I found it laughable that he literally said it was bad that, as a pro, modern is too diverse for him to break the format.
This may be a harsh stance to take, but IMO, anyone who uses angle shooting (which this example clearly is) deserves to lose every single game of magic they ever play again. If you're countering esper charm, announce it. If it resolves, wait for them to announce the mode. If you're trying to make them discard on a stupid technicality, then (and again, admittedly harsh) you're not good enough to win on your own. No, rules lawyering doesn't make you "good" at magic. While knowing unique interactions is very important to figure out niche effects and the sort, gaining an edge "by any means possible" with those rules and technicalities is one of the worst aspects of the competitive mtg community.
This is akin to the ketterson RiP scenario from a while back. You know what the opponent is doing, playing dumb just makes you look dumb.
Wait, dont you declare the mode on cast? Gatherer.
10/1/2008 While the spell is on the stack, treat it as though its only text is the chosen mode. The other two modes are treated as though they don’t exist. You don’t choose targets for those modes.
I thought as you cast the spell, you had to choose the Mode, so then you can choose to let it Resolve as Draw, or Discard, or whatever? Like if I dont care if my opponent draws 2, but wouldnt want Discard 2, I'm not going to just let it resolve and then have them tell me 'oh you discard 2'.
Yeah, I'm just saying if you aren't interacting in any way w/ esper charm (such as a counter) and they haven't announced the mode yet,wait for them to say the mode or ask which mode. Asking "target me or you" is trying to gain an advantage in the scummiest way possible. Sorry if unclear!
Noob question here, since I'm an online player (never played on paper beyond kitchen table when young):
If I cast Esper Charm and say nothing, isn't it implied that there are no targets and thus the chosen mode is "I draw two"? If the opponent ask for targets, don't I just say "no targets"? Maybe it's scummy on their part, but I should know what my cards do. The situation really doesn't strike as some obscure rules technicality: it only requires targets for the enchantment and discard modes.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern:WU WU Control | WBG Abzan Company Frontier:UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
Noob question here, since I'm an online player (never played on paper beyond kitchen table when young):
If I cast Esper Charm and say nothing, isn't it implied that there are no targets and thus the chosen mode is "I draw two"? If the opponent ask for targets, don't I just say "no targets"? Maybe it's scummy on their part, but I should know what my cards do. The situation really doesn't strike as some obscure rules technicality: it only requires targets for the enchantment and discard modes.
Correct, everything you say is accurate. The issue is that there isn't a need for the opponent to ask "target me or you" in any scenario. The person who casts esper charm would be declaring draw 2 (or discard 2) unless an opponent cuts them off and asks for a target before a mode is announced. The ONLY reason an opponent would do this is an attempt to trip the player up and make them discard on a technicality.
Noob question here, since I'm an online player (never played on paper beyond kitchen table when young):
If I cast Esper Charm and say nothing, isn't it implied that there are no targets and thus the chosen mode is "I draw two"? If the opponent ask for targets, don't I just say "no targets"? Maybe it's scummy on their part, but I should know what my cards do. The situation really doesn't strike as some obscure rules technicality: it only requires targets for the enchantment and discard modes.
Correct, everything you say is accurate. The issue is that there isn't a need for the opponent to ask "target me or you" in any scenario. The person who casts esper charm would be declaring draw 2 (or discard 2) unless an opponent cuts them off and asks for a target before a mode is announced. The ONLY reason an opponent would do this is an attempt to trip the player up and make them discard on a technicality.
Gotcha. Is the opponent allowed to cut me off and ask for targets before the mode is even announced though? I don't think so. Judges should default in those situations to protect the player who cast the spell IMO.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern:WU WU Control | WBG Abzan Company Frontier:UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
Since someone brought up Esper Charm I want the community's opinion on something (75% of you probably know where I am going with this).
Let's say you are playing against someone and they cast Esper Charm. You ask the question, "Are you targeting me, or targeting yourself?"
Your opponent replies, "I am targeting myself"
At FNM or another non-Comp REL event, do you just let it slide and let them draw 2 cards?
What about at a Comp REL event?
What about at a Pro REL event?
I'm asking because the last Comp REL even I went to this came up, and the guy called a Judge on his opponent for drawing instead of discarding. For the rest of the tournament, I noticed almost everyone who got paired against him had this, "Why did I have to get paired against the scumbag" attitude to them.
I feel Modern is, and always has been, a format where if you don't understand interactions like this you deserve to be punished for it. But what are everyone else's takes?
That is some high quality rule Lawyering. At FNM it slides at a serious event I paid money to travel and compete in, I'm standing up and doing my best Phoenix Wright impression, this is exactly what we mean when we talk about "technical playing skills" aka playing by the rule book as technically as possible. Not the kind of victory you would be proud about and brag to others like it was cool but still a victory.
Since someone brought up Esper Charm I want the community's opinion on something (75% of you probably know where I am going with this).
Let's say you are playing against someone and they cast Esper Charm. You ask the question, "Are you targeting me, or targeting yourself?"
Your opponent replies, "I am targeting myself"
At FNM or another non-Comp REL event, do you just let it slide and let them draw 2 cards?
What about at a Comp REL event?
What about at a Pro REL event?
I'm asking because the last Comp REL even I went to this came up, and the guy called a Judge on his opponent for drawing instead of discarding. For the rest of the tournament, I noticed almost everyone who got paired against him had this, "Why did I have to get paired against the scumbag" attitude to them.
I feel Modern is, and always has been, a format where if you don't understand interactions like this you deserve to be punished for it. But what are everyone else's takes?
That is some high quality rule Lawyering. At FNM it slides at a serious event I paid money to travel and compete in, I'm standing up and doing my best Phoenix Wright impression, this is exactly what we mean when we talk about "technical playing skills" aka playing by the rule book as technically as possible. Not the kind of victory you would be proud about and brag to others like it was cool but still a victory.
To me this is not a exanple of technical playing skill. It is more of knowing how to get a specific reaction from a judge. This isn't as much a magic skill as it is social skill because at the end of the day it comes down to who can convince a judge. An example of technical playing skill is not bolting a 2/3 goyf with no instant in the yard.
Since someone brought up Esper Charm I want the community's opinion on something (75% of you probably know where I am going with this).
Let's say you are playing against someone and they cast Esper Charm. You ask the question, "Are you targeting me, or targeting yourself?"
Your opponent replies, "I am targeting myself"
At FNM or another non-Comp REL event, do you just let it slide and let them draw 2 cards?
What about at a Comp REL event?
What about at a Pro REL event?
I'm asking because the last Comp REL even I went to this came up, and the guy called a Judge on his opponent for drawing instead of discarding. For the rest of the tournament, I noticed almost everyone who got paired against him had this, "Why did I have to get paired against the scumbag" attitude to them.
I feel Modern is, and always has been, a format where if you don't understand interactions like this you deserve to be punished for it. But what are everyone else's takes?
That is some high quality rule Lawyering. At FNM it slides at a serious event I paid money to travel and compete in, I'm standing up and doing my best Phoenix Wright impression, this is exactly what we mean when we talk about "technical playing skills" aka playing by the rule book as technically as possible. Not the kind of victory you would be proud about and brag to others like it was cool but still a victory.
To me this is not a exanple of technical playing skill. It is more of knowing how to get a specific reaction from a judge. This isn't as much a magic skill as it is social skill because at the end of the day it comes down to who can convince a judge. An example of technical playing skill is not bolting a 2/3 goyf with no instant in the yard.
No they are both examples of technical play skill it is the rules that once you declare something it is on the stack no take back's. Getting punished for declaring something you really didn't intend is really very similar to a player getting punished because that they didn't understand that the gofy goes up to 3/4 on the instance the card resolves, i've seen plenty of newer players make that error. I understand that this isn't going to play out the way they think it will but I don't broadcast it and I am still at that moment allowing them to make a terrible misplay do to a technical aspect of the game.
To be clear tap,tap,tap esper charm? is meaningless you are supposed to declare the mode on casting it isn't some ambiguous card that you only choose after it resolves, if I have a counterspell in hand the mode you select could dictate my choice of countering it. The play error is certainly on the caster of esper charm here and if I exploit your sloppy play to my benefit then didn't the better player just get rewarded for being better at the game.
Like I said if its FNM I would let it slide but not at a GP or something nope.
Since someone brought up Esper Charm I want the community's opinion on something (75% of you probably know where I am going with this).
Let's say you are playing against someone and they cast Esper Charm. You ask the question, "Are you targeting me, or targeting yourself?"
Your opponent replies, "I am targeting myself"
At FNM or another non-Comp REL event, do you just let it slide and let them draw 2 cards?
What about at a Comp REL event?
What about at a Pro REL event?
I'm asking because the last Comp REL even I went to this came up, and the guy called a Judge on his opponent for drawing instead of discarding. For the rest of the tournament, I noticed almost everyone who got paired against him had this, "Why did I have to get paired against the scumbag" attitude to them.
I feel Modern is, and always has been, a format where if you don't understand interactions like this you deserve to be punished for it. But what are everyone else's takes?
That is some high quality rule Lawyering. At FNM it slides at a serious event I paid money to travel and compete in, I'm standing up and doing my best Phoenix Wright impression, this is exactly what we mean when we talk about "technical playing skills" aka playing by the rule book as technically as possible. Not the kind of victory you would be proud about and brag to others like it was cool but still a victory.
To me this is not a exanple of technical playing skill. It is more of knowing how to get a specific reaction from a judge. This isn't as much a magic skill as it is social skill because at the end of the day it comes down to who can convince a judge. An example of technical playing skill is not bolting a 2/3 goyf with no instant in the yard.
No they are both examples of technical play skill it is the rules that once you declare something it is on the stack no take back's. Getting punished for declaring something you really didn't intend is really very similar to a player getting punished because that they didn't understand that the gofy goes up to 3/4 on the instance the card resolves, i've seen plenty of newer players make that error. I understand that this isn't going to play out the way they think it will but I don't broadcast it and I am still at that moment allowing them to make a terrible misplay do to a technical aspect of the game.
I simply disagree the goyf example comes down purely to a understanding of the rules the esper charm example involves in part being able to convince a judge and arguable misrepresenting what happened during the game
Everyone can say that they believe that it's a scummy move and maybe at least the people here are not the few that would attempt such a thing, but I guarantee you that there are players who do this. I could give examples. I could give names of players I've seen. But I'll leave it at this. I have seen it happen many, many times before. Percentage wise, I think these types of players probably try it less than 1%, but when you play as often as I do, you see it and hear about it from other close friends.
I personally try to not associate myself with these types of players, but when money's on the line and someone is grinding with a goal in mind, they don't always have "barriers" on how they reach those goals.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
At Regular REL, the emphasis is on learning, so judge calling the Esper Charm target is indeed rules lawyering (and your opponent will be permitted to draw 2 cards). But at Competitive REL, it's your responsibility to know what your cards do and to clearly announce your actions. I feel like the players calling it rules lawyering at Comp actually just don't play in Comp events. There's nothing "scummy" about forcing your opponent to discard in that kind of setting. Ask a judge.
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
At Regular REL, the emphasis is on learning, so judge calling the Esper Charm target is indeed rules lawyering (and your opponent will be permitted to draw 2 cards). But at Competitive REL, it's your responsibility to know what your cards do and to clearly announce your actions. I feel like the players calling it rules lawyering at Comp actually just don't play in Comp events. There's nothing "scummy" about forcing your opponent to discard in that kind of setting. Ask a judge.
Is it not misrepresenting the gamestate by the opponent modes have not been declared and the opponent is acting as if they had
Everyone can say that they believe that it's a scummy move and maybe at least the people here are not the few that would attempt such a thing, but I guarantee you that there are players who do this. I could give examples. I could give names of players I've seen. But I'll leave it at this. I have seen it happen many, many times before. Percentage wise, I think these types of players probably try it less than 1%, but when you play as often as I do, you see it and hear about it from other close friends.
I personally try to not associate myself with these types of players, but when money's on the line and someone is grinding with a goal in mind, they don't always have "barriers" on how they reach those goals.
I saw a Hall of Famer do something even worse to a buddy and then write an article for one of the major sites where in it he refers to that situation and completely lies about what happened. So I agree, it's actually very prevalent.
That said I agree with ashton - if you think this is scummy for Comp REL you probably don't play much Comp REL.
I also agree with some others who have mentioned that there really shouldn't have been an option for this to happen. Announce your modes.
At Regular REL, the emphasis is on learning, so judge calling the Esper Charm target is indeed rules lawyering (and your opponent will be permitted to draw 2 cards). But at Competitive REL, it's your responsibility to know what your cards do and to clearly announce your actions. I feel like the players calling it rules lawyering at Comp actually just don't play in Comp events. There's nothing "scummy" about forcing your opponent to discard in that kind of setting. Ask a judge.
You're right player says targeting me they should discard but the bit that people are debating as 'scummy' is not asking 'which mode?', but 'targeting?'.
It's a jerk move if done on purpose despite it being within the rules.
And just because lots of players are scum bags doesn't make it acceptable no matter what level you're playing.
At Regular REL, the emphasis is on learning, so judge calling the Esper Charm target is indeed rules lawyering (and your opponent will be permitted to draw 2 cards). But at Competitive REL, it's your responsibility to know what your cards do and to clearly announce your actions. I feel like the players calling it rules lawyering at Comp actually just don't play in Comp events. There's nothing "scummy" about forcing your opponent to discard in that kind of setting. Ask a judge.
You're right player says targeting me they should discard but the bit that people are debating as 'scummy' is not asking 'which mode?', but 'targeting?'.
It's a jerk move if done on purpose despite it being within the rules.
And just because lots of players are scum bags doesn't make it acceptable no matter what level you're playing.
Eh. If you're that averse to reading your own cards you should really just avoid Comp IMO.
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
At regular REL, I think you let it slide. Even judges tend to downgrade penalties at regular REL, so it's not really worth calling a judge. At most, they get a warning and rewind to them casting it with the correct mode selected. If you're at Comp or higher, you call a judge and they probably enforce the only viable option, citing that a player should know how their card works. It can be a little bit scummy but when you're playing at a rules enforcement level where players are expected to know how their cards work, you should be enforcing that they do know. People always get mad at things like this or think you're scum, but it's always within your right to do so. You shouldn't be thinking that they're calling a judge to screw you, but that they're not sure what should happen (because honestly, you probably have resolved the card incorrectly at this point).
Modern has a lot of interactions people don't know very well, and Magic as a whole is confusing. You should always opt not to punish players, but at competitive events you need to uphold some of the game's integrity. Like if you ask for the target for Oblivion Ring, we're holding you to having let it resolve no matter what (they might even do this at regular REL as well). No player deserves to be punished except in the case they're intentionally doing bad things.
Grixis Death's Shadow, Jund, UW Tron, Jeskai Control, Storm, Counters Company, Eldrazi Tron, Affinity, Living End, Infect, Merfolk, Dredge, Ad Nauseam, Amulet, Bogles, Eldrazi Tron, Mono U Tron, Lantern, Mardu Pyromancer
I know you didn't ask about regular or casual REL, but I'll give those as well.
Regular and Casual REL - you 100% let them take it back.
Comp REL - technically, the play stands and he has to discard. It is rules lawyering, but it is within the rules. It's not going to keep the guy from looking like a scumbag to some. However, this may not be acknowledged as well - some people accept it and realize that they should be more careful.
Pro REL - they 100% can do this. But there are a few things in play. Firstly, most players on the Pro Tour wouldn't make that type of mistake. They announce everything audibly or it is recognized between both players. It is very unlikely to happen at the Pro Level. You want to maintain some type of integrity at the higher levels (which is why players like Paul Rietzl are so admired), but they are playing for a BIG monetary prize, so often anything can go. As a Pro, it is a tough distinction between trying to accomplish something at any price or maintaining integrity and not being known as "that guy."
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Modern Decks:
UBG Lantern Control GBU
BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks
UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU
BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
I didn't know that. I've played a lot of Day 2s at GPs and I didn't notice anything in the announcements that said so. Also I didn't "feel" it for what that's worth (obviously you can tell that Day 2s feel a lot more competitive and cutthroat, but I didn't feel it was Pro level). Admittedly I hadn't played in a GP for a long time before Vegas though, Day 2ing the Modern portion. The last GP I played before it was Vegas MM2015.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)If a player did that and then called a judge, that player should be given a misconduct warning imo. Angle shooting is not cool.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
Deserve to lose is a strong choice of words. For me games shouldn't be decided on some wording technicality where one person is obviously trying to manipulate the other into saying a specific phrase. Now there is a line to be drawn but it's very arbitrary. This specific instance to me isn't about someone not knowing how a card works but one not recognising what that they are being tricked into saying something. I also think they way we handle modal cards is dumb. The mode should be the first thing declared that way you avoid this nonsense
That being said, one reason I love modern is that it contains a ton of complex interactions. I don't enjoy that because I like tricking people, but because this is a format that rewards extensive knowledge of dozens of archetypes and lines of play. It continues to make me laugh that some pros complain about modern because they want to have a very clear, established meta so that they can try to prepare the best deck. Seriously, Mengucci wrote about this yesterday for CFB I found it laughable that he literally said it was bad that, as a pro, modern is too diverse for him to break the format.
I also think, 100% the Esper Charm example is dishonest manipulation of the other player, but i'm just here to play.
Spirits
This is akin to the ketterson RiP scenario from a while back. You know what the opponent is doing, playing dumb just makes you look dumb.
Affinity
Death & Taxes
Mardu Nahiri
Forcing people to merge with twitch is stupid
10/1/2008 While the spell is on the stack, treat it as though its only text is the chosen mode. The other two modes are treated as though they don’t exist. You don’t choose targets for those modes.
I thought as you cast the spell, you had to choose the Mode, so then you can choose to let it Resolve as Draw, or Discard, or whatever? Like if I dont care if my opponent draws 2, but wouldnt want Discard 2, I'm not going to just let it resolve and then have them tell me 'oh you discard 2'.
Spirits
Affinity
Death & Taxes
Mardu Nahiri
Forcing people to merge with twitch is stupid
Spirits
If I cast Esper Charm and say nothing, isn't it implied that there are no targets and thus the chosen mode is "I draw two"? If the opponent ask for targets, don't I just say "no targets"? Maybe it's scummy on their part, but I should know what my cards do. The situation really doesn't strike as some obscure rules technicality: it only requires targets for the enchantment and discard modes.
Frontier: UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
Correct, everything you say is accurate. The issue is that there isn't a need for the opponent to ask "target me or you" in any scenario. The person who casts esper charm would be declaring draw 2 (or discard 2) unless an opponent cuts them off and asks for a target before a mode is announced. The ONLY reason an opponent would do this is an attempt to trip the player up and make them discard on a technicality.
Affinity
Death & Taxes
Mardu Nahiri
Forcing people to merge with twitch is stupid
Frontier: UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
That is some high quality rule Lawyering. At FNM it slides at a serious event I paid money to travel and compete in, I'm standing up and doing my best Phoenix Wright impression, this is exactly what we mean when we talk about "technical playing skills" aka playing by the rule book as technically as possible. Not the kind of victory you would be proud about and brag to others like it was cool but still a victory.
To me this is not a exanple of technical playing skill. It is more of knowing how to get a specific reaction from a judge. This isn't as much a magic skill as it is social skill because at the end of the day it comes down to who can convince a judge. An example of technical playing skill is not bolting a 2/3 goyf with no instant in the yard.
No they are both examples of technical play skill it is the rules that once you declare something it is on the stack no take back's. Getting punished for declaring something you really didn't intend is really very similar to a player getting punished because that they didn't understand that the gofy goes up to 3/4 on the instance the card resolves, i've seen plenty of newer players make that error. I understand that this isn't going to play out the way they think it will but I don't broadcast it and I am still at that moment allowing them to make a terrible misplay do to a technical aspect of the game.
To be clear tap,tap,tap esper charm? is meaningless you are supposed to declare the mode on casting it isn't some ambiguous card that you only choose after it resolves, if I have a counterspell in hand the mode you select could dictate my choice of countering it. The play error is certainly on the caster of esper charm here and if I exploit your sloppy play to my benefit then didn't the better player just get rewarded for being better at the game.
Like I said if its FNM I would let it slide but not at a GP or something nope.
I simply disagree the goyf example comes down purely to a understanding of the rules the esper charm example involves in part being able to convince a judge and arguable misrepresenting what happened during the game
I personally try to not associate myself with these types of players, but when money's on the line and someone is grinding with a goal in mind, they don't always have "barriers" on how they reach those goals.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
Is it not misrepresenting the gamestate by the opponent modes have not been declared and the opponent is acting as if they had
That said I agree with ashton - if you think this is scummy for Comp REL you probably don't play much Comp REL.
I also agree with some others who have mentioned that there really shouldn't have been an option for this to happen. Announce your modes.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
You're right player says targeting me they should discard but the bit that people are debating as 'scummy' is not asking 'which mode?', but 'targeting?'.
It's a jerk move if done on purpose despite it being within the rules.
And just because lots of players are scum bags doesn't make it acceptable no matter what level you're playing.
Legacy - LED Dredge, ANT & WDnT
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy