What if I decide to pair my Soulbond creature to a third creature when it is paired already to another one?
I simply can't?
Do I have to destroy the first paired creature to get this Soulbond creature free?
You don't even get the chance. If your Soulbond guy is already paired, it won't even trigger when new creatures enter the battlefield. The only way to 'unpair' it is to make it so you don't control both it and the thing it's paired to. Bounce one, kill one, exile one, give control of one to someone else. You can't just 'turn it off'.
Because changing decks mid event is allowed right? At that point its too late anyways.
"Too late" in what way? Too late to put in the Ponders, sure. Too late to fix the deck? Not by a long shot, not at any REL. The fix for "a deck has illegal cards for the format" at Regular REL is to remove all the illegal cards, and if the deck is too small to be used legally, add basic lands of that player's choice until it's at 60. Then move on. No penalty besides a finger-wag and an explanation.
The fix at Comp and Professional is a Game Loss for Deck/Decklist problem. The illegal cards are taken out of the deck, basic lands are added to 'fill', the decklist is changed to match the new deck, and you move on.
So they just have match slips that work on the honor system? Not sure how much I like that.
For sure I'd talk to your TO about your concerns. Ask them to at least try and be a little more structured with how results are reported; as much as I don't super like using match slips for an FNM, it might be a good idea to make sure that match slips are MANDATORY, and that both players need to have signed the slips for them to be accepted.
There's really very little that can be done here. The TO has no proof that the match went the way you said it did, other than your word. The usual 'policy' we have on match slips, as far as I know, is "if your signature is on it, you agreed to it". You should never sign the match slip unless you have made sure it's right.
When the Words' ability resolves, the Active Player will make his/her choice, then the Active Player, then both of the chosen permanents will be returned to their owner's hands simultaneously.
101.4. If multiple players would make choices and/or take actions at the same time, the active player (the player whose turn it is) makes any choices required, then the next player in turn order (usually the player seated to the active player’s left) makes any choices required, followed by the remaining nonactive players in turn order. Then the actions happen simultaneously. This rule is often referred to as the “Active Player, Nonactive Player (APNAP) order” rule.
There is no 'first' here. Your Sisay's Ingenuity will return to your hand at the same time as your opponent's creature.
Haha, are you joking? He gained no advantage from having a 4 card board. This would only be a problem if he had 4 more in the board for a total of 19.
At the very worst he would of gotten "hey next time you have to have exactly 15" or "oh you need to go grab 11 lands from the landbox"
The very worst at FNM, sure. The very worst he'd get at a Comp REL event would be a Game Loss for Deck/Decklist Problem. They'd fix it by adding 11 basic lands to the sideboard, and move on from there.
I'm aware of why it exists. Having the mentality of "we can't enforce it" is a large part of the problem. Having a player base that "allows it because you can't stop it" and takes advantage of it is as well. There are reasons I don't play competitive Magic anymore and most of them lie along the lines of sacrificing integrity and sportsmanship over what should just be fundamental to having any respect for the game. Proving Bribery/Collusion is difficult as well, but one is widely acceptable (ID'ing and Conceding to improve position) while the other isn't (Cheating/Bribery/etc.) for some odd reason in Magic circles.
It's not a mentality, it's a fact. There's no way to stop players from intentionally throwing games to get around an inability to scoop, unless you're gonna start penalizing them for 'not playing to win' or somesuch nonsense. And even then, either the penalty for that doesn't stop them [is a Warning], gets them exactly what they want [a Game Loss/Match Loss], or is a DQ for them not playing to win. Do we really want a rule saying you MUST play to win every game, because we've made it against the rules to scoop your opponent up, or to agree to an ID and split the prizes or something like that?
It's not a mentality that it'd be 'too hard', it's the fact that even if we did, it would stop very little at all. It's a lot easier and more reasonable for a judge to investigate on Bribery/Collusion than it is for us to start handing out penalties for people not playing to win.
The fact that Magic allows and encourages concessions/intentional draws speaks volumes about what is wrong with its tournament scene.
If you don't understand the concept of what someone pointed out and posted above than you just don't get sportsmanship and the integrity of a game in general. Not playing for any reason other than "you don't want to" is 100% correct in regards to being an insult to competition.
Concede so we can both make Top 8. You don't need a win and we can both get in. I'll return the favor later.
Just because something is allowed by the rules or tournament structure doesn't automatically mean you should do it. Ethics, honor, and sportsmanship should be behind all your actions. Go look up the history of golf or cricket. Where people call penalties on themselves all the time because of the game's honor.
Bobby Jones. The 1925 US Open Finals Play-Off. Go look it up. You either GET that or you DON'T. Whichever side you fall on speaks volumes and volumes about your character in competition. The average Magic player who manipulates standings for Top 8 does not.
Especially if you do it and than get your opponent disqualified for collusion or bribery. That's all I've got.
Most judges aren't huge fans of it being okay for people to scoop each other into Top 8, or doing IDs. We might not hate it as vehemently as people in these forums, but we aren't exactly super huge fans.
The thing is, it's pretty much impossible to stop it. If I want to concede this game because it'll get you into the Top 8 with me, and I want you in the Top 8 because you're a good matchup for me, I can just scoop. And even if you say "No scooping someone into the Top 8" or somesuch, I can just totally throw the game intentionally. Ditto for an ID. Both players can just play the game to draw it out as long as possible. As long as they aren't playing slowly, they can just play to draw, and they WILL draw. All you've done by not allowing them to just call the game a draw is make them waste time doing it.
It's a necessary evil. It's nigh impossible to flat-out stop people from conceding or drawing intentionally, so they just let it be. Now, it is possible to keep bribery/collusion a Very Bad Thing. So it is.
Honestly the difference in "skill" in lines of play between the fnm regular, the grinder type, and people on the actual pro tour gets really indistinguishable really fast.
The actual "skill" component is largely in deck choice and tweaks and more than anything like someone said in good vs bad keeps.
I disagree, unless you think deck choice and tweaks are why the same players tend to rise to the top in tournaments.
I personally believe that 'skill' is comprised of a lot of different things. Deck choice based on meta, tweaks for the meta, technical play, creativity with plays, etc. I don't care if I pick the best deck possible for the matchup against you, if you don't have the technical skill to know what's a bad hand, when to mull, and what plays to make, chances are that I'm going to destroy you if I -do- have that skill.
Double-Faced cards are always face-up. If something tries to turn them face down, it just doesn't do anything.
Quote from Comp Rules »
711.6. A double-faced permanent always has the status “face up” (see rule 110.6). Double-faced permanents can’t be turned face down. If a spell or ability tries to turn a double-faced permanent face down, nothing happens.
Mark Rosewater had an interesting comment about Magic in his last article. He said:
"A big part of what makes Magic click is the community. As I've often said, most players spend the minority of their time on Magic actually playing the game. The majority of time spent by most invested players is interacting with other invested players—be that reading, talking, or posting."
So, I've become curious about Magic content and what players are reading, watching, or listening to.
What kind of Magic content do you consume other than the posts on this forum?
What type of content would you like to see more of?
Is there content that hasn't been done yet that you think you would like?
I was just thinking about this the other day. I love Magic, and I seem to eat, drink, and breathe the game, but I only get to play for maybe a few hours a week. I hang out in the Judge IRC and talk about interesting scenarios and policy and general stuff; I answer rules questions there and in the Rulings forum here, as well as Ask A Judge threads. I talk about it with friends, I write a weekly 'tip' for the Magic Judges Rule Blog thing, all sorts of stuff.
He means that you separate your land into one pile and your spells into another to start the game, and then you get to choose which pile to draw from every time you would draw a card.
Again, how would that stop 53 land combo decks? Put in 53 lands and only the combo pieces you need as your starting grip of 7. Separate the deck, draw your combo pieces, then draw only the lands you need to combo off for several turns. Way, way too easily exploited.
Or heck. I play Oracle of Mul Daya. Do I play with the top card of both decks revealed? Does that basically give me 2 free land drops per turn from my 'land' deck without having me draw any land cards, because I just keep drawing from my nonland pile?
Removing an aspect of the game that multiple cards and interactions more or less depend on [the fact that you have to have a proper balance of lands, and that you only have one deck] is a recipe for disaster, just as bad as "let's make a format where everyone has infinite mana, but can only cast one spell per turn".
There is no question that magic requires a lot of skill or I'd be a lot better than I am after 18 years.
Magic is also a game of luck and I have seen more than my share of good and bad in that time. I've seen card combos come out that the odds against were astronomical.
In fact, just this last Friday, my friend mulligans down to THREE cards. They were all lands.
Ready for this?
Turn 1 - Land
Turn 2 - Land, Thalia (must have drawn it on turn 2 as he was on the play)
Turn 3 - Land, Mirran Crusader (must have drawn it turn 3)
Turn 4 - Land (must have drawn it that turn)
Turn 5 - Hero of Bladehold (must have drawn it that turn)
Turn 6 - Sword of War and Peace (must have draw it that turn)
He ended up winning that game (had he not conceded before playing it out just for fun) with a 3 card, 3 land hand to start.
I don't know what the odds of that draw happening are. I do know that in 18 years of Magic I have never seen anybody come back from a 3 card mulligan.
I'm just glad he conceded after the 4 card draw (he drew 3 just to see what would have happened) or I would have been in a state of shock and out of the top 8. In the meantime, I am sure he was kicking himself for conceding. I felt really bad for him. He's a good friend of mine.
Point is, the luck factor is there in spades. Make no mistake about it. No matter how good you are, you're going to lose games like that. Conversely, no matter how bad you are, you're going to win games like that too.
How often? THAT is where skill comes in.
I disagree completely. There's times when luck is an enormous factor in the game, but you shouldn't confuse intensity of the factor with frequency or impact.
Are there games where you just get 15 lands in a row handed to you and nothing you can do will help you to win? Sure. Are there games where the very gods of probability smile upon you and hand you exactly what you need, when you need it, and your opponent won't stand a chance? Probably.
Thing is, those are the absolute extremes of luck. That's not the norm, that's not the standard, that's extreme edge-cases where you draw the nuts. In nine out of ten games, you're going to be getting luck somewhere between 'cannot possibly win' and 'cannot possibly lose', more than likely along the axis of 'relatively normal'. And it'll be skill that decides it. Yes, luck is a factor of the game, and yes no matter how hard you try, sometimes it's just lucksack, but part of the game's skill is to minimize how much of an impact luck will have on your game, and to make it as infrequent a factor as possible. You COULD just throw however many lands you want into a deck, but proper skill in building your curve and your deck and your land count will help to make it so that you tend to get the right amount of mana in the right colors at the right time, consistently. The whole POINT of that is to minimize the amount of times that luck costs you games because you drew 15 lands, or went 12 turns without hitting a third land drop.
Outcry has been heard by the TO... many times.. from countless people.
The verdict?
"You don't like the rules? Don't play."
Looked up my points... I don't see "competitive" as a type of points on there.. however, when compared to, say, a pre-release at the same place, it gives the same amount and types of points. FNM gives the same types of points as well, except it also gives FNM points...
The solution is easy, then. You go up to the TO again, and tell him that he can't report these as actual regular Vintage events, and he can't advertise them as such, because of his 'custom' banlist. Re-inform him that you and multiple others don't like the way he does things, and if he starts the "Don't like my made-up rules? Don't play" crap, that you will do exactly that. You'll all quit playing in his shop, quit buying his product, and report him to Wizards for knowingly running improper events. If he continues to be a jerk, then let him be a jerk. Vote with your wallets, and let WotC handle him. Either he'll learn his lesson and not tell his customer base that it's his way or the highway when most of said customers don't like his events, or he'll go broke.
Are you going to a FNM or to a Magic war? Mother of supplies...
I'm looking for a decent backpack too, the one i'm currently using is tearing my binder's edges apart I fit in a playmat and a chessex 36 dice box inside my Razer Megasoma case (wich is awesome by the way) and put it inside my standard bag with an ION deck box and a notepad. The bag gets too full when i stick my binder along.
If anyone has a good bag suggestion that can handle a ring binder, i'm all in.
Neither! I just grab my bag when I go to play Magic with my friends, since we tend to play for hours at a time and we play lots of different combinations of formats and stuff. I figure if I can fit all my stuff into my bag anyway, why bring just one deck? I keep a deathgrip on it at all times, and it has some good security features, so that's always nice.
You don't even get the chance. If your Soulbond guy is already paired, it won't even trigger when new creatures enter the battlefield. The only way to 'unpair' it is to make it so you don't control both it and the thing it's paired to. Bounce one, kill one, exile one, give control of one to someone else. You can't just 'turn it off'.
"Too late" in what way? Too late to put in the Ponders, sure. Too late to fix the deck? Not by a long shot, not at any REL. The fix for "a deck has illegal cards for the format" at Regular REL is to remove all the illegal cards, and if the deck is too small to be used legally, add basic lands of that player's choice until it's at 60. Then move on. No penalty besides a finger-wag and an explanation.
The fix at Comp and Professional is a Game Loss for Deck/Decklist problem. The illegal cards are taken out of the deck, basic lands are added to 'fill', the decklist is changed to match the new deck, and you move on.
For sure I'd talk to your TO about your concerns. Ask them to at least try and be a little more structured with how results are reported; as much as I don't super like using match slips for an FNM, it might be a good idea to make sure that match slips are MANDATORY, and that both players need to have signed the slips for them to be accepted.
There is no 'first' here. Your Sisay's Ingenuity will return to your hand at the same time as your opponent's creature.
The very worst at FNM, sure. The very worst he'd get at a Comp REL event would be a Game Loss for Deck/Decklist Problem. They'd fix it by adding 11 basic lands to the sideboard, and move on from there.
It's not a mentality, it's a fact. There's no way to stop players from intentionally throwing games to get around an inability to scoop, unless you're gonna start penalizing them for 'not playing to win' or somesuch nonsense. And even then, either the penalty for that doesn't stop them [is a Warning], gets them exactly what they want [a Game Loss/Match Loss], or is a DQ for them not playing to win. Do we really want a rule saying you MUST play to win every game, because we've made it against the rules to scoop your opponent up, or to agree to an ID and split the prizes or something like that?
It's not a mentality that it'd be 'too hard', it's the fact that even if we did, it would stop very little at all. It's a lot easier and more reasonable for a judge to investigate on Bribery/Collusion than it is for us to start handing out penalties for people not playing to win.
Most judges aren't huge fans of it being okay for people to scoop each other into Top 8, or doing IDs. We might not hate it as vehemently as people in these forums, but we aren't exactly super huge fans.
The thing is, it's pretty much impossible to stop it. If I want to concede this game because it'll get you into the Top 8 with me, and I want you in the Top 8 because you're a good matchup for me, I can just scoop. And even if you say "No scooping someone into the Top 8" or somesuch, I can just totally throw the game intentionally. Ditto for an ID. Both players can just play the game to draw it out as long as possible. As long as they aren't playing slowly, they can just play to draw, and they WILL draw. All you've done by not allowing them to just call the game a draw is make them waste time doing it.
It's a necessary evil. It's nigh impossible to flat-out stop people from conceding or drawing intentionally, so they just let it be. Now, it is possible to keep bribery/collusion a Very Bad Thing. So it is.
I disagree, unless you think deck choice and tweaks are why the same players tend to rise to the top in tournaments.
I personally believe that 'skill' is comprised of a lot of different things. Deck choice based on meta, tweaks for the meta, technical play, creativity with plays, etc. I don't care if I pick the best deck possible for the matchup against you, if you don't have the technical skill to know what's a bad hand, when to mull, and what plays to make, chances are that I'm going to destroy you if I -do- have that skill.
I was just thinking about this the other day. I love Magic, and I seem to eat, drink, and breathe the game, but I only get to play for maybe a few hours a week. I hang out in the Judge IRC and talk about interesting scenarios and policy and general stuff; I answer rules questions there and in the Rulings forum here, as well as Ask A Judge threads. I talk about it with friends, I write a weekly 'tip' for the Magic Judges Rule Blog thing, all sorts of stuff.
Again, how would that stop 53 land combo decks? Put in 53 lands and only the combo pieces you need as your starting grip of 7. Separate the deck, draw your combo pieces, then draw only the lands you need to combo off for several turns. Way, way too easily exploited.
Or heck. I play Oracle of Mul Daya. Do I play with the top card of both decks revealed? Does that basically give me 2 free land drops per turn from my 'land' deck without having me draw any land cards, because I just keep drawing from my nonland pile?
Removing an aspect of the game that multiple cards and interactions more or less depend on [the fact that you have to have a proper balance of lands, and that you only have one deck] is a recipe for disaster, just as bad as "let's make a format where everyone has infinite mana, but can only cast one spell per turn".
I disagree completely. There's times when luck is an enormous factor in the game, but you shouldn't confuse intensity of the factor with frequency or impact.
Are there games where you just get 15 lands in a row handed to you and nothing you can do will help you to win? Sure. Are there games where the very gods of probability smile upon you and hand you exactly what you need, when you need it, and your opponent won't stand a chance? Probably.
Thing is, those are the absolute extremes of luck. That's not the norm, that's not the standard, that's extreme edge-cases where you draw the nuts. In nine out of ten games, you're going to be getting luck somewhere between 'cannot possibly win' and 'cannot possibly lose', more than likely along the axis of 'relatively normal'. And it'll be skill that decides it. Yes, luck is a factor of the game, and yes no matter how hard you try, sometimes it's just lucksack, but part of the game's skill is to minimize how much of an impact luck will have on your game, and to make it as infrequent a factor as possible. You COULD just throw however many lands you want into a deck, but proper skill in building your curve and your deck and your land count will help to make it so that you tend to get the right amount of mana in the right colors at the right time, consistently. The whole POINT of that is to minimize the amount of times that luck costs you games because you drew 15 lands, or went 12 turns without hitting a third land drop.
The solution is easy, then. You go up to the TO again, and tell him that he can't report these as actual regular Vintage events, and he can't advertise them as such, because of his 'custom' banlist. Re-inform him that you and multiple others don't like the way he does things, and if he starts the "Don't like my made-up rules? Don't play" crap, that you will do exactly that. You'll all quit playing in his shop, quit buying his product, and report him to Wizards for knowingly running improper events. If he continues to be a jerk, then let him be a jerk. Vote with your wallets, and let WotC handle him. Either he'll learn his lesson and not tell his customer base that it's his way or the highway when most of said customers don't like his events, or he'll go broke.
Neither! I just grab my bag when I go to play Magic with my friends, since we tend to play for hours at a time and we play lots of different combinations of formats and stuff. I figure if I can fit all my stuff into my bag anyway, why bring just one deck? I keep a deathgrip on it at all times, and it has some good security features, so that's always nice.