Being unable to be countered doesn't mean it is an illegal target for Undermine.
Undermine will just fail to counter the spell, then you'll lose 3 life.
the point was that if you use colourless mana you can counter your own creature if the opponent Undermines it (as you can't successfully counter undermine)
edit: actually they can just activate Vexing Shusher on your creature spell in that case. say they cast Autumn's Veil instead of having shusher out
I wish my 4/4s with haste and first strike that acted as Goblin Warchiefs were better and didn't die to instants and overshadowed all other 4 drops in the format. And that they had evasion too, and some way to dodge wrath effects.
I dont like how this will lead to people countering spells they didnt know were uncounterable let alone confusion when out of order sequencing leads to one person playing two creatures at once and the opponent having to ask which one is the cavern being used for and then the opponent taking back whatever creature he deems to be the least worthy and just playing the one? seems this leads to far more problems of rules sharking than catering for someone not willing/too lazy/too forgetful to clarify that their spell is uncounterable.
Sounds to me like a lot of people just love winning on technicalities.
It sounds to me like a lot of people are championing poor play by supporting a change that essentially stops the need to announce abilities of objects aside from doing anything but tapping them. This will lead to more confusion than simply requiring players to announce what abilities they're playing when they're tapping a single permanent that has 2 abilities on it.
So what counts as announcing? Pointing to it? Saying activating? What if they just say using? Do you see the issue at hand? Because all of us discussing it on the judge listserv did. The most important part of a card is its design an intended purpose, and that was made clear by R&D. Just because you can't hope for play mistakes doesn't mean this ruling is wrong, it means your understanding is simply within a narrow, "how can I win" scope as opposed to a design and ruling scope.
Simply saying 'adding Red for X' where X is the card name is a pretty CLEAR indication of what ability you're using. Just like when you tap a reflecting pool or something you say the mana type;
Think of this situation; If i tapped 6 other lands (we'll say two of them are blue) and 3 more, in addition to a cavern (we'll say the cavern was on angels or something); And then I play upheaval; in response to the upheaval my opponent plays a spell that changes which Angel i'd like to see in play or maybe I won't want to play an Angel; with this rule change it's assumed i'm using the second ability even though I didn't announce it; my opponent has no clue which color I picked, nor is he sure if I picked colorless or a specific color of mana for a specific creature type. Maybe I could lie and say 'Nah it was colorless, i'm playing X spell in response to yours' or maybe I can say 'Red mana' and play a lightning angel instead of an Emeria Angel. Either way, it was an assumption that I did it correctly. This leads to more problems than; "that's countered, since you didn't announce which color you were adding" since in the first example of misplay it's deception as opposed to poor play on the part of the Cavern of Souls controller.
It seems to me like it's rather important in certain situations to be pretty friggin' explicit about which ability I'm using on the land; and when those situations could be there, why not just make the player practice good habits and force him to announce which friggin ability and for what color he's tapping it for?
It's ludicrous that this is even an issue. "We want this insanely skill-unintensive card to be that much more skill-unintensive by making a optional ability not optional."
If it's stacked under land and you just tap the whole stack without saying where you're getting mana, it'd be pretty easy for you opponent to mistake you not tapping a Cavern and have him try to counter the spell; thus making it fizzle; sounds to me like the player with the caverns what to win on technicalities; see how easy that mode of arguing is to flip around? This is just going to lead to more confusion, angry players, rather than making players announce the ability.
Think of this situation; If i tapped 6 other lands (we'll say two of them are blue) and 3 more, in addition to a cavern (we'll say the cavern was on angels or something); And then I play upheaval; in response to the upheaval my opponent plays a spell that changes which Angel i'd like to see in play or maybe I won't want to play an Angel; with this rule change it's assumed i'm using the second ability even though I didn't announce it; my opponent has no clue which color I picked, nor is he sure if I picked colorless or a specific color of mana for a specific creature type. Maybe I could lie and say 'Nah it was colorless, i'm playing X spell in response to yours' or maybe I can say 'Red mana' and play a lightning angel instead of an Emeria Angel. Either way, it was an assumption that I did it correctly. This leads to more problems than; "that's countered, since you didn't announce which color you were adding" since in the first example of misplay it's deception as opposed to poor play on the part of the Cavern of Souls controller.
This situation is in no way exclusive to Cavern of Souls, any land that taps for two or more colors has "the same problem".
Anyway, I think your argument is largely moot. If you tap lands to float mana (like in your example) you should always clarify what mana you tap for, because this is very different than simply tapping lands during casting a spell.
Also, there is nothing preventing your opponent from asking you what you are tapping for (when floating excess mana before Upheaval it may be very relevant).
This situation is in no way exclusive to Cavern of Souls, any land that taps for two or more colors has "the same problem".
Anyway, I think your argument is largely moot. If you tap lands to float mana (like in your example) you should always clarify what mana you tap for, because this is very different than simply tapping lands during casting a spell.
Also, there is nothing preventing your opponent from asking you what you are tapping for (when floating excess mana before Upheaval it may be very relevant).
I'm not sure if played when QnT was a popular deck in standard, but it was incredibly skill intensive when tapping for mana, alone. simply tapping filters, vivids and removing counters and laying down spells isn't enough; If you have you don't have to explicitly say what mana your tapping for, like, what's the point? Seriously, it was a pretty big deal in that deck. How is my point moot when communicating what exactly you're doing to your opponent is incredibly important, no matter the case?
It's like tapping a Llanowar Elf during your combat step, and when they go to ping it with a Gut Shot, and you're like, "Use my one green floating," out of nowhere. This ruling will lead to more deception and headache than simply making the person playing the card explicitly state a color of mana (or lack thereof) when tapping it. This isn't about 'rule lawyering' it's about an easily comprehended game state and communicating your actions to an opponent in a good way.
This entire argument boils down to Spikes wanting to gain a technical advantage on newer players that don't understand some technicalities AnD players that assume an opponent has the brain power to deduce that their Cavern of Souls that named rebels is using the second ability to cast a 1WW Rebel creature when that player controls CoS, a Forest, and a Plains.
This does not dumb down the game. This does not make the game easier for "noobs" to beat more experienced players. This does not take ANYTHING away from the game, PERIOD.
What it does do however, is provide newer players learning the ropes an opportunity to not get sharked/layered out of a legitimate play. Heck, if the opponent notices they are new, can then take the time to explain how some other abilities that are similar to the wording on CoS work, thus improving the new players knowledge of the rules, and providing a friends and encouraging experience which is incentive to keep playing. Do you really think a new player would want to play again after being berated by a rule lawyer and getting a penalty for something he/she thought he/she was doing right? OF COURSE NOT.
tl;dr: Get over it. Don't try to win on technicality's. Be friendly and help teach younger/inexperienced players the ropes. That is how Magic will continue to grow.
It sounds to me like a lot of people are championing poor play by supporting a change that essentially stops the need to announce abilities of objects aside from doing anything but tapping them. This will lead to more confusion than simply requiring players to announce what abilities they're playing when they're tapping a single permanent that has 2 abilities on it.
Think of this situation; If i tapped 6 other lands (we'll say two of them are blue) and 3 more, in addition to a cavern (we'll say the cavern was on angels or something); And then I play upheaval; in response to the upheaval my opponent plays a spell that changes which Angel i'd like to see in play or maybe I won't want to play an Angel; with this rule change it's assumed i'm using the second ability even though I didn't announce it; my opponent has no clue which color I picked, nor is he sure if I picked colorless or a specific color of mana for a specific creature type. Maybe I could lie and say 'Nah it was colorless, i'm playing X spell in response to yours' or maybe I can say 'Red mana' and play a lightning angel instead of an Emeria Angel.
I recommend reviewing floating mana rules to learn why your example is invalid.
106.4a If a player passes priority (see rule 116) while there is mana in his or her mana pool, that player announces what mana is there. If any mana remains in a player’s mana pool after he or she spends mana to pay a cost, that player announces what mana is still there.
It is the responsibility of both players to clarify when passing priority which mana is left, which will then clearly reveal which mana was spent to place any spell(s) onto the stack. The end result is you'll know exactly which mana is left before any response, and certainly before your opponent casts another spell after getting priority back.
It's ironic that many of the complaints raised on this thread come from the same rules-ignorance being complained about. This ruling change has completely negligible impact on the legality of game play, it simply avoids needless judge calling and confusion in favor of honoring the intention of the card, which is to make uncounterable any spell that is applicable.
The one situation where it will be applicable is if the caster tried to change his/her mind and use the colorless ability. In that case they would get overruled as by default it will use the second ability if possible unless they state otherwise. Luckily this situation will come up far less often than the reverse, which is another good reason for the updated ruling.
It sounds to me like a lot of people are championing poor play by supporting a change that essentially stops the need to announce abilities of objects aside from doing anything but tapping them. This will lead to more confusion than simply requiring players to announce what abilities they're playing when they're tapping a single permanent that has 2 abilities on it.
Man do I hate rules lawyers. The essential given in any game of magic is you will at all points keep the game state in its proper state at all times for both players. When 1 player uses the ability to case say a humans is called (lets go with snapcaster mage being cast just because it's in the rotation right now). We have a glacial fortress, cavern of souls, and lets go with a plains for this first scenario. Cavern and the plains is tapped for the snapcaster now clearly the only viable text is to say I am using the caverns second ability to add mana with the plains providing the colorless requirement of Tiago. Ok now with you saying I have to declare that begins to slow the game down even more with each step. When I then tap the glacial and the caverns is when you say you have trouble understanding "sloppy" play, but the game state has to be corrected at every chance so if he casts you counter as the person countering you would actually have to go backwards and correct the gamestate of the casting or call a judge to correct it yet taking up more time from the match because you are trying to be a dick about how mana is being used. This ruling has nothing to do with "sloppy" gameplay as you call it and all to do with people like you not wasting epic proportions of time during tournaments because game state has to be corrected repeatedly over and over. That is the reason for this change since pretty much in all competitive arenas you will be using abilities properly and skipping the long winded explanations at each step of a turn. I don't have 3 days to play a single game of magic (Yes exaggeration, but hey if you can exaggerate so can I.)
wow. Some players need to get over themselves. Why should you need to declare you're tapping it for coloured mana to summon a creature of the chosen type? That isn't being idiotic, dumb or forgetful. That was the intent of the card. What is there to nerd rage/be a douche over?
The only "bad thing" happening to magic that I see in this thread are piss poor attitudes and general lack of any sort of sportsmanship. You are playing a game.
wow. Some players need to get over themselves. Why should you need to declare you're tapping it for coloured mana to summon a creature of the chosen type? That isn't being idiotic, dumb or forgetful. That was the intent of the card. What is there to nerd rage/be a douche over?
The only "bad thing" happening to magic that I see in this thread are piss poor attitudes and general lack of any sort of sportsmanship. You are playing a game.
You're right, it's poor sportsmanship to want your opponent to announce what they're doing. How silly of me.
Man do I hate rules lawyers. The essential given in any game of magic is you will at all points keep the game state in its proper state at all times for both players. When 1 player uses the ability to case say a humans is called (lets go with snapcaster mage being cast just because it's in the rotation right now). We have a glacial fortress, cavern of souls, and lets go with a plains for this first scenario. Cavern and the plains is tapped for the snapcaster now clearly the only viable text is to say I am using the caverns second ability to add mana with the plains providing the colorless requirement of Tiago. Ok now with you saying I have to declare that begins to slow the game down even more with each step. When I then tap the glacial and the caverns is when you say you have trouble understanding "sloppy" play, but the game state has to be corrected at every chance so if he casts you counter as the person countering you would actually have to go backwards and correct the gamestate of the casting or call a judge to correct it yet taking up more time from the match because you are trying to be a dick about how mana is being used. This ruling has nothing to do with "sloppy" gameplay as you call it and all to do with people like you not wasting epic proportions of time during tournaments because game state has to be corrected repeatedly over and over. That is the reason for this change since pretty much in all competitive arenas you will be using abilities properly and skipping the long winded explanations at each step of a turn. I don't have 3 days to play a single game of magic (Yes exaggeration, but hey if you can exaggerate so can I.)
This would be all fine and dandy if indeed as someone who played a counterspell into a Cavern unknowingly I did indeed get to go back in time when i called a judge and 'take back' the counter. But, here's the deal, the creature whether it's Caverned or not is a perfectly legal target for a counterspell. Meaning, your counter would try to counter it and fail to do so; and you'd lose out on a counterspell simply because your opponent didn't say 'tapping cavern for blue/white/green/red/black'. And I think that calling a judge over to clarify whenever your opponent stealth taps a CoS (whether or not this is intentional isn't the question) if you lose your counterspell or not takes A LOT less time than simply saying "cavern for a blue" that took me 3 seconds to say. Let's say I use it every turn for 10 turns. That's 30 seconds. And that's if I don't do things like lay down the spell while I'm saying it. You're wasting very little time this way. Now, if I call a judge over to clarify I'm liable to waste at least a minute or not doing anything whatsoever while the judge walks over, and at least a minute for him to clarify.
That's four times as much time wasted. And hey, let's not **** ourselves here, it takes more than 2 minutes for a judge to properly explain what happened, etc.
I don't know if someone mentioned this scenario but let me explain it first and see what the judges of the forum will say.
Assuming that my opponent has 2 CoS and he stated 2 different creature types (humans for one & angels for the other). And he has both CoS next to each other.
Then he taps one of them with some other lands that produce color to play a human without saying anything (which of course by the new rules cannot be countered because you don't have to declare it since you tap CoS to play creature that was declared). Then he taps the other CoS plus some other lands to play another human. The second human of course is counterable, BUT then he might say that he used for the first human colorless from the CoS and for the 2nd human he used the CoS that make the humans uncounterable. He could insist by saying that since he didn't say anything he ment for the 2nd human to be uncounterable and that I could counter the first.
Another variation of the above example is if he taps all of his mana and puts 2 humans into play (some players tend to do that) and has 2 CoS with only one declared with the creture type "Human". If I try to counter one of them he will say that, that is the uncounterable and if I ask for which one he used colored mana from the CoS is like saying that I hava a counter at my hand. Also at the first example if I ask if he used colored mana or not again is like saying that I have the counter!
What will happen at the above cases? Can some judge elaborate with details?
Scenario 1: The new assumption only works one way. If you don't declare you are intentionally not using it on the human in question, then you are. So the second is counterable.
Scenario 2: You can't cast two spell simultaneously, the player has to stop and clarify. Asking what mana he used does not inherently reveal any information. If you only ask for clarification when you have a counter in hand, then you are the person giving the signal. You can ask when you don't have a counter and he still is forced to clarify.
This would be all fine and dandy if indeed as someone who played a counterspell into a Cavern unknowingly I did indeed get to go back in time when i called a judge and 'take back' the counter. But, here's the deal, the creature whether it's Caverned or not is a perfectly legal target for a counterspell. Meaning, your counter would try to counter it and fail to do so; and you'd lose out on a counterspell simply because your opponent didn't say 'tapping cavern for blue/white/green/red/black'. And I think that calling a judge over to clarify whenever your opponent stealth taps a CoS (whether or not this is intentional isn't the question) if you lose your counterspell or not takes A LOT less time than simply saying "cavern for a blue" that took me 3 seconds to say. Let's say I use it every turn for 10 turns. That's 30 seconds. And that's if I don't do things like lay down the spell while I'm saying it. You're wasting very little time this way. Now, if I call a judge over to clarify I'm liable to waste at least a minute or not doing anything whatsoever while the judge walks over, and at least a minute for him to clarify.
"Stealth taps CoS"? How is that at all different from tapping Boseiju, Who Shelters All? And I have never seen these kind of complaints about that card.
Basically, if you are playing counterspells you should never forget during that game that your opponent has a Cavern of Souls/Boseiju on the battlefield. Trying to argue otherwise is just silly.
If you as a control player try to counter a Cavern of Souls-enchanced spell when you know your opponent has one on the battlefield, then you surely deserve to lose that counter. You are the one who screwed up, not your opponent who didn't stress "Cavern of Souls for blue/red/etc".
"Stealth taps CoS"? How is that at all different from tapping Boseiju, Who Shelters All? And I have never seen these kind of complaints about that card.
Basically, if you are playing counterspells you should never forget during that game that your opponent has a Cavern of Souls/Boseiju on the battlefield. Trying to argue otherwise is just silly.
If you as a control player try to counter a Cavern of Souls-enchanced spell when you know your opponent has one on the battlefield, then you surely deserve to lose that counter. You are the one who screwed up, not your opponent who didn't stress "Cavern of Souls for blue/red/etc".
Boseiju has a pay 2 life in the cost; so you have to tell your opponent "Paying 2 life to do Boseiju" because you have to announce changes in life. That's how it's different. And likely why you never heard that complaint; not only that but unless you have an Urborg in play Boseiju ONLY adds mana with that ability.
That's why it's different. And by 'Stealth Tap' i mean they have a pile of land, turn it all sideways and play the spell. It's rather EASY to miss the fact that the spell is 'Uncounterable' in this case. And if i kneejerk a Mana Leak, then it HAS to be played. Even though the gamestate at the point in time was cloudy and I had no clue CoS was tapped for a color (thus turning on the second ability) my counterspell gets fizzled.
I can't honestly believe why this topic went on for 11 pages. The change makes sense. If you think the rule is stupid you should just grow up. I can't think of a good reason why the rule should be reversed.
I can't honestly believe why this topic went on for 11 pages. The change makes sense. If you think the rule is stupid you should just grow up. I can't think of a good reason why the rule should be reversed.
I don't understand either why people can still continue to argue against this change. Simply shocking.
If the store owner says that I can't trade in the premises, I'll just go outside. If he says that I can't trade within 10m of his premises, I'll go to 11 meters. If he says that he doesn't want to see me trading, I will put a basket over his head and continue trading.
Yes, he's a local legend. He's only known to take his clothes off before he goes into the Ladies' Lockerroom. Nobody knows what he does in there because he's invisible, but it's almost certainly tons of masturbating.
If the store owner says that I can't trade in the premises, I'll just go outside. If he says that I can't trade within 10m of his premises, I'll go to 11 meters. If he says that he doesn't want to see me trading, I will put a basket over his head and continue trading.
Yes, he's a local legend. He's only known to take his clothes off before he goes into the Ladies' Lockerroom. Nobody knows what he does in there because he's invisible, but it's almost certainly tons of masturbating.
Wow, I think I'm a bit slow, took me a while to understand what the change was
An example, just to get my brain in order regarding this:
I put the Cavern onto the battlefield, choosing Ooze as it enters
- If I tap to cast an Ooze, it's auto-considered uncounterable
Makes sense to me.
A more accurate statement is that you use one of the two abilities on the card to make your ooze uncounterable.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Originally Posted by Massive Marc
You know back in the old days, when there wasn't EDH, these "griefer" cards in decks were the norm. If you played a Winter Orb when you're opponents were tapped out, it was a good play. Now, you get people tell you they wanna punch you ? It's really sad how carebare this format is, to the point that some loser has to rip up your cards.
Totally agree it is ridiculous, I almost wanted to change the quote in my signature to the one assuming pple tapped painlands for colored mana when they cast colorless spells. This type of logic is absurd.
Yet it was a huge problem for their entire duration in standard when judges were called. Sometimes it was a mistake, and sometimes players were sketchy, but do you want to know why Judges now take written evidence over die/gems that track life totals? It was painlands, not only that even when both notepads didn't matchup, people called judges on each other all the time. It was a complete mess because there was no declaring.
Life Totals and Numbers of Mana leaks are going to differ based on Cavern of Souls and Painlands, but the rules shouldn't change because of "spirit". Wizards should send these cards to Judges, long beforehand so they can help reword the damn thing if they feel it will cause problems.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
the point was that if you use colourless mana you can counter your own creature if the opponent Undermines it (as you can't successfully counter undermine)
edit: actually they can just activate Vexing Shusher on your creature spell in that case. say they cast Autumn's Veil instead of having shusher out
My current decks!
http://tappedout.net/users/ThePhasewalker/
It sounds to me like a lot of people are championing poor play by supporting a change that essentially stops the need to announce abilities of objects aside from doing anything but tapping them. This will lead to more confusion than simply requiring players to announce what abilities they're playing when they're tapping a single permanent that has 2 abilities on it.
Simply saying 'adding Red for X' where X is the card name is a pretty CLEAR indication of what ability you're using. Just like when you tap a reflecting pool or something you say the mana type;
Think of this situation; If i tapped 6 other lands (we'll say two of them are blue) and 3 more, in addition to a cavern (we'll say the cavern was on angels or something); And then I play upheaval; in response to the upheaval my opponent plays a spell that changes which Angel i'd like to see in play or maybe I won't want to play an Angel; with this rule change it's assumed i'm using the second ability even though I didn't announce it; my opponent has no clue which color I picked, nor is he sure if I picked colorless or a specific color of mana for a specific creature type. Maybe I could lie and say 'Nah it was colorless, i'm playing X spell in response to yours' or maybe I can say 'Red mana' and play a lightning angel instead of an Emeria Angel. Either way, it was an assumption that I did it correctly. This leads to more problems than; "that's countered, since you didn't announce which color you were adding" since in the first example of misplay it's deception as opposed to poor play on the part of the Cavern of Souls controller.
It seems to me like it's rather important in certain situations to be pretty friggin' explicit about which ability I'm using on the land; and when those situations could be there, why not just make the player practice good habits and force him to announce which friggin ability and for what color he's tapping it for?
It's ludicrous that this is even an issue. "We want this insanely skill-unintensive card to be that much more skill-unintensive by making a optional ability not optional."
If it's stacked under land and you just tap the whole stack without saying where you're getting mana, it'd be pretty easy for you opponent to mistake you not tapping a Cavern and have him try to counter the spell; thus making it fizzle; sounds to me like the player with the caverns what to win on technicalities; see how easy that mode of arguing is to flip around? This is just going to lead to more confusion, angry players, rather than making players announce the ability.
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
This situation is in no way exclusive to Cavern of Souls, any land that taps for two or more colors has "the same problem".
Anyway, I think your argument is largely moot. If you tap lands to float mana (like in your example) you should always clarify what mana you tap for, because this is very different than simply tapping lands during casting a spell.
Also, there is nothing preventing your opponent from asking you what you are tapping for (when floating excess mana before Upheaval it may be very relevant).
I'm not sure if played when QnT was a popular deck in standard, but it was incredibly skill intensive when tapping for mana, alone. simply tapping filters, vivids and removing counters and laying down spells isn't enough; If you have you don't have to explicitly say what mana your tapping for, like, what's the point? Seriously, it was a pretty big deal in that deck. How is my point moot when communicating what exactly you're doing to your opponent is incredibly important, no matter the case?
It's like tapping a Llanowar Elf during your combat step, and when they go to ping it with a Gut Shot, and you're like, "Use my one green floating," out of nowhere. This ruling will lead to more deception and headache than simply making the person playing the card explicitly state a color of mana (or lack thereof) when tapping it. This isn't about 'rule lawyering' it's about an easily comprehended game state and communicating your actions to an opponent in a good way.
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
This does not dumb down the game. This does not make the game easier for "noobs" to beat more experienced players. This does not take ANYTHING away from the game, PERIOD.
What it does do however, is provide newer players learning the ropes an opportunity to not get sharked/layered out of a legitimate play. Heck, if the opponent notices they are new, can then take the time to explain how some other abilities that are similar to the wording on CoS work, thus improving the new players knowledge of the rules, and providing a friends and encouraging experience which is incentive to keep playing. Do you really think a new player would want to play again after being berated by a rule lawyer and getting a penalty for something he/she thought he/she was doing right? OF COURSE NOT.
tl;dr: Get over it. Don't try to win on technicality's. Be friendly and help teach younger/inexperienced players the ropes. That is how Magic will continue to grow.
I recommend reviewing floating mana rules to learn why your example is invalid.
It is the responsibility of both players to clarify when passing priority which mana is left, which will then clearly reveal which mana was spent to place any spell(s) onto the stack. The end result is you'll know exactly which mana is left before any response, and certainly before your opponent casts another spell after getting priority back.
It's ironic that many of the complaints raised on this thread come from the same rules-ignorance being complained about. This ruling change has completely negligible impact on the legality of game play, it simply avoids needless judge calling and confusion in favor of honoring the intention of the card, which is to make uncounterable any spell that is applicable.
The one situation where it will be applicable is if the caster tried to change his/her mind and use the colorless ability. In that case they would get overruled as by default it will use the second ability if possible unless they state otherwise. Luckily this situation will come up far less often than the reverse, which is another good reason for the updated ruling.
Man do I hate rules lawyers. The essential given in any game of magic is you will at all points keep the game state in its proper state at all times for both players. When 1 player uses the ability to case say a humans is called (lets go with snapcaster mage being cast just because it's in the rotation right now). We have a glacial fortress, cavern of souls, and lets go with a plains for this first scenario. Cavern and the plains is tapped for the snapcaster now clearly the only viable text is to say I am using the caverns second ability to add mana with the plains providing the colorless requirement of Tiago. Ok now with you saying I have to declare that begins to slow the game down even more with each step. When I then tap the glacial and the caverns is when you say you have trouble understanding "sloppy" play, but the game state has to be corrected at every chance so if he casts you counter as the person countering you would actually have to go backwards and correct the gamestate of the casting or call a judge to correct it yet taking up more time from the match because you are trying to be a dick about how mana is being used. This ruling has nothing to do with "sloppy" gameplay as you call it and all to do with people like you not wasting epic proportions of time during tournaments because game state has to be corrected repeatedly over and over. That is the reason for this change since pretty much in all competitive arenas you will be using abilities properly and skipping the long winded explanations at each step of a turn. I don't have 3 days to play a single game of magic (Yes exaggeration, but hey if you can exaggerate so can I.)
The only "bad thing" happening to magic that I see in this thread are piss poor attitudes and general lack of any sort of sportsmanship. You are playing a game.
You're right, it's poor sportsmanship to want your opponent to announce what they're doing. How silly of me.
This would be all fine and dandy if indeed as someone who played a counterspell into a Cavern unknowingly I did indeed get to go back in time when i called a judge and 'take back' the counter. But, here's the deal, the creature whether it's Caverned or not is a perfectly legal target for a counterspell. Meaning, your counter would try to counter it and fail to do so; and you'd lose out on a counterspell simply because your opponent didn't say 'tapping cavern for blue/white/green/red/black'. And I think that calling a judge over to clarify whenever your opponent stealth taps a CoS (whether or not this is intentional isn't the question) if you lose your counterspell or not takes A LOT less time than simply saying "cavern for a blue" that took me 3 seconds to say. Let's say I use it every turn for 10 turns. That's 30 seconds. And that's if I don't do things like lay down the spell while I'm saying it. You're wasting very little time this way. Now, if I call a judge over to clarify I'm liable to waste at least a minute or not doing anything whatsoever while the judge walks over, and at least a minute for him to clarify.
That's four times as much time wasted. And hey, let's not **** ourselves here, it takes more than 2 minutes for a judge to properly explain what happened, etc.
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
Scenario 1: The new assumption only works one way. If you don't declare you are intentionally not using it on the human in question, then you are. So the second is counterable.
Scenario 2: You can't cast two spell simultaneously, the player has to stop and clarify. Asking what mana he used does not inherently reveal any information. If you only ask for clarification when you have a counter in hand, then you are the person giving the signal. You can ask when you don't have a counter and he still is forced to clarify.
"Stealth taps CoS"? How is that at all different from tapping Boseiju, Who Shelters All? And I have never seen these kind of complaints about that card.
Basically, if you are playing counterspells you should never forget during that game that your opponent has a Cavern of Souls/Boseiju on the battlefield. Trying to argue otherwise is just silly.
If you as a control player try to counter a Cavern of Souls-enchanced spell when you know your opponent has one on the battlefield, then you surely deserve to lose that counter. You are the one who screwed up, not your opponent who didn't stress "Cavern of Souls for blue/red/etc".
DCI Level 1 Judge
Then you should notify them that it is against the rules.
Boseiju has a pay 2 life in the cost; so you have to tell your opponent "Paying 2 life to do Boseiju" because you have to announce changes in life. That's how it's different. And likely why you never heard that complaint; not only that but unless you have an Urborg in play Boseiju ONLY adds mana with that ability.
That's why it's different. And by 'Stealth Tap' i mean they have a pile of land, turn it all sideways and play the spell. It's rather EASY to miss the fact that the spell is 'Uncounterable' in this case. And if i kneejerk a Mana Leak, then it HAS to be played. Even though the gamestate at the point in time was cloudy and I had no clue CoS was tapped for a color (thus turning on the second ability) my counterspell gets fizzled.
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
No, we are refraining from punishing players who don't point out the obvious.
I drop CoS naming elves, tap and immediately drop a Llanowar and you'll call the judge because I did say "green"?
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com/
RUGLegacy Lands.dec
RUGBLegacy Lands.dec
RGLegacy Lands.dec
WUBRG EDH Lands.dec
UBR EDH Artificer Prodigy
B EDH Relentless Rats
My Saffi deck
I was just coming in here to say this. How is this thread still going strong and it is in the rumor mill?
I don't understand either why people can still continue to argue against this change. Simply shocking.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumAn example, just to get my brain in order regarding this:
I put the Cavern onto the battlefield, choosing Ooze as it enters
- If I tap to cast an Ooze, it's auto-considered uncounterable
Makes sense to me.
Atrius' Posts 1W
Instant
You win target thread. If you aren't Atrius, Atrius wins that thread instead.
"Wait, can you actually win a thread?" - Atrius.
Agree it make sense, but apparently not to a select few who is arguing against this rule change.
A more accurate statement is that you use one of the two abilities on the card to make your ooze uncounterable.
You know back in the old days, when there wasn't EDH, these "griefer" cards in decks were the norm. If you played a Winter Orb when you're opponents were tapped out, it was a good play. Now, you get people tell you they wanna punch you ? It's really sad how carebare this format is, to the point that some loser has to rip up your cards.
Yet it was a huge problem for their entire duration in standard when judges were called. Sometimes it was a mistake, and sometimes players were sketchy, but do you want to know why Judges now take written evidence over die/gems that track life totals? It was painlands, not only that even when both notepads didn't matchup, people called judges on each other all the time. It was a complete mess because there was no declaring.
Life Totals and Numbers of Mana leaks are going to differ based on Cavern of Souls and Painlands, but the rules shouldn't change because of "spirit". Wizards should send these cards to Judges, long beforehand so they can help reword the damn thing if they feel it will cause problems.