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.
So you're willing to purposely ask a deceptive question to get an edge? Good to know. Personally would ask the player which mode but each to their own.
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.
This isn't a failure to read cards it's an opponent jumping the gun on choosing modes
I won't say too much about "tourney cheese" or "competition cheddar" except that I believe it's something competitive Magic is going to have to overcome if it wants to appeal to a broader audience. The ability in tournament magic to deceive your opponent using minutiae of the competition rules as opposed to the rules of the actual game is disgusting and severely limits the game's ability to appeal.
I don't have any real difficulties with it myself since adopting an "announce everything" mentality - but it's really disturbing that people seek to gain edges on the other side of that by not announcing anything unless it's strictly required and trying to get people with vague interpretation of shortcuts and so on.
In my opinion everyone and everything should be working to create a good, fair game of Magic - the judges, rules and players. The first rule should be "What did the player intend?" and that should trump everything. When that is actually unclear, go to the complex rule structure, but if it's clear someone intended to draw 2 off esper charm, they draw 2 off esper charm ffs.
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.
So you're willing to purposely ask a deceptive question to get an edge? Good to know. Personally would ask the player which mode but each to their own.
I think you're looking at this the wrong way. I doubt Ashton is saying that he would do this. He's saying that players at Comp REL should be wary that these types of things can happen and prepare for it. All the player had to do was announce modes or if he was interrupted, he could just tell his opponent that he didn't announce modes yet.
At FNM, I get Inquistioned or Thoughtseized quite often. I usually ask my opponent who they are targeting, so that I don't reveal my hand in the case of something like targeting one's self, discarding Griselbrand for example. Most of the times, I know what my opponent's doing, but why not be 100% sure?
At a WNM last week, I was receiving an important text and during my upkeep my opponent went for Surgical Extraction on a card in my graveyard. I handed him the deck and immediately realized that I should have targeted myself with my Relic of Progenitus. Since I had already given my opponent the deck, I decided to live with the poor decision that I made while I was distracted. Yes, even at Regular REL, some players hold themselves to standards that they deem within their own reach. (I was pretty ashamed of myself the moment I handed him the deck.) Maybe these examples don't seem to corollate, but my point here is that you have to hold yourself to the highest playing standard if you are playing at Comp REL. I've seen it before...players doing their first PPTQ and getting handed to the wolves.
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)
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
no the caster of esper charm is making a error when not declaring the mode on casting; tap, tap, tap, esper charm? that means nothing if he isn't announcing the mode he is selecting then he is leaving himself open to getting screwed by the rules of the game.
At a WNM last week, I was receiving an important text and during my upkeep my opponent went for Surgical Extraction on a card in my graveyard. I handed him the deck and immediately realized that I should have targeted myself with my Relic of Progenitus. Since I had already given my opponent the deck, I decided to live with the poor decision that I made while I was distracted. Yes, even at Regular REL, some players hold themselves to standards that they deem within their own reach. (I was pretty ashamed of myself the moment I handed him the deck.) Maybe these examples don't seem to corollate, but my point here is that you have to hold yourself to the highest playing standard if you are playing at Comp REL. I've seen it before...players doing their first PPTQ and getting handed to the wolves.
Now imagine if you had done this at comp Rel and instead you had simply touched your deck, then remembered that you needed to relic yourself and activated relic. Opponent called a judge and said you had touched your deck and assumed that meant you had passed priority and allowed surgical to resolve.
Unbeknownst to you there is a tourney rule that touching your deck is a shortcut for handing your deck to your opponent, rule 9273.1 Appendix Q.
That more closely approximates the way tournament magic rules lawyering occurs.
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.
So you're willing to purposely ask a deceptive question to get an edge? Good to know. Personally would ask the player which mode but each to their own.
What does "tap,tap, tap : esper charm" mean? the rules of the game state that the caster is supposed to declare the chosen mode at the time that you cast it, not to wait for your opponent to respond in some way. I mean if you say okay to "tap tap tap esper charm" you could just as easily say that the opponent allowed the spell to resolve and you simply announce the mode after fact?
If the esper charm caster had to learn the hard way that he needs to cast his spells properly than that is a painful lesson in technical play.
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.
So you're willing to purposely ask a deceptive question to get an edge? Good to know. Personally would ask the player which mode but each to their own.
I think you're looking at this the wrong way. I doubt Ashton is saying that he would do this. He's saying that players at Comp REL should be wary that these types of things can happen and prepare for it. All the player had to do was announce modes or if he was interrupted, he could just tell his opponent that he didn't announce modes yet.
At FNM, I get Inquistioned or Thoughtseized quite often. I usually ask my opponent who they are targeting, so that I don't reveal my hand in the case of something like targeting one's self, discarding Griselbrand for example. Most of the times, I know what my opponent's doing, but why not be 100% sure?
This. There are even ways for Wizards to address these issues as they see fit, as they did with the tapping-an-extra-land-and-holding-up-two-for-Leak instance.
no the caster of esper charm is making a error when not declaring the mode on casting; tap, tap, tap, esper charm? that means nothing if he isn't announcing the mode he is selecting then he is leaving himself open to getting screwed by the rules of the game.
This. Declaring modes is part of casting a spell. If you say "Esper Charm?" and your opponent says "target?" and you say "myself?" you most certainly deserve to discard 2. It could even be argued you were intending to deceive your opponent by casting the Charm and passing priority without first completing your cast by declaring the mode, which is actually against the rules.
At a WNM last week, I was receiving an important text and during my upkeep my opponent went for Surgical Extraction on a card in my graveyard. I handed him the deck and immediately realized that I should have targeted myself with my Relic of Progenitus. Since I had already given my opponent the deck, I decided to live with the poor decision that I made while I was distracted. Yes, even at Regular REL, some players hold themselves to standards that they deem within their own reach. (I was pretty ashamed of myself the moment I handed him the deck.) Maybe these examples don't seem to corollate, but my point here is that you have to hold yourself to the highest playing standard if you are playing at Comp REL. I've seen it before...players doing their first PPTQ and getting handed to the wolves.
Now imagine if you had done this at comp Rel and instead you had simply touched your deck, then remembered that you needed to relic yourself and activated relic. Opponent called a judge and said you had touched your deck and assumed that meant you had passed priority and allowed surgical to resolve.
Unbeknownst to you there is a tourney rule that touching your deck is a shortcut for handing your deck to your opponent, rule 9273.1 Appendix Q.
That more closely approximates the way tournament magic rules lawyering occurs.
And that's fine. In this instance, the judge comes over, he refers you to that rule, and he informs you the Surgical is resolving because you engaged in that shortcut, whether you knew it or not (protips: you are supposed to know the rules at Comp, and you are even told explicitly at the beginning of a Comp event by the judge that "your opponent does not have your best interests at heart"). Instead of complaining over "rules lawyering," the productive response is to absorb that information so that you can avoid embarrassing yourself in another Comp tournament, or simply to play carefully in the future so that this kind of situation rarely arises again in the first place.
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.
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
no the caster of esper charm is making a error when not declaring the mode on casting; tap, tap, tap, esper charm? that means nothing if he isn't announcing the mode he is selecting then he is leaving himself open to getting screwed by the rules of the game.
People will cut you off before you can say what modes. Do we really want a contest of who can speak faster. The player casting the spell gets none of the reward and all of the punishment from this system. What if the casting player has a speech problem. Why are we rewarding this jump the gun behavior. So let's say my opponent casts cryptic command can I then name off half of the modal combinations in hopes they choose the wrong one
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.
So you're willing to purposely ask a deceptive question to get an edge? Good to know. Personally would ask the player which mode but each to their own.
I think you're looking at this the wrong way. I doubt Ashton is saying that he would do this. He's saying that players at Comp REL should be wary that these types of things can happen and prepare for it. All the player had to do was announce modes or if he was interrupted, he could just tell his opponent that he didn't announce modes yet.
At FNM, I get Inquistioned or Thoughtseized quite often. I usually ask my opponent who they are targeting, so that I don't reveal my hand in the case of something like targeting one's self, discarding Griselbrand for example. Most of the times, I know what my opponent's doing, but why not be 100% sure?
At a WNM last week, I was receiving an important text and during my upkeep my opponent went for Surgical Extraction on a card in my graveyard. I handed him the deck and immediately realized that I should have targeted myself with my Relic of Progenitus. Since I had already given my opponent the deck, I decided to live with the poor decision that I made while I was distracted. Yes, even at Regular REL, some players hold themselves to standards that they deem within their own reach. (I was pretty ashamed of myself the moment I handed him the deck.) Maybe these examples don't seem to corollate, but my point here is that you have to hold yourself to the highest playing standard if you are playing at Comp REL. I've seen it before...players doing their first PPTQ and getting handed to the wolves.
If that's what he means then I apologise and completely agree. The best way to play magic (including at the kitchen table to ensure good habits) is to announce everything you're doing and ensure your opponent does the same.
Scumming opponents goes both ways ('thoughtseize' silence - reveal your hand 'oh no I'm discarding my griselbrand')
That's the main thing really we don't want to put off new players to any level of the game.
Instead of complaining over "rules lawyering," the productive response is to absorb that information so that you can avoid embarrassing yourself in another Comp tournament, or simply to play carefully in the future so that this kind of situation rarely arises again in the first place.
Yeah, and what I'm saying is I think the game would be a better place if the expected situation is that everyone is trying to achieve fairness first and victory second. Instead of making and doggedly enforcing stupid rules like this (see the Old "go to Combat" shortcut) we should all strive to achieve a fairness.
The mental game of magic should be about what cards your opponent has and what plays they can make, not about whether someone accidentally says a wrong word that maps to a shortcut buried in the depths of the rules compendium.
I have no issue following comp-rel rules myself from a capability perspective but I think the game would be better if this attitude changed culturally. It's utterly toxic.
Edit:
Again, I agree that on a personal level your goal is to get good at tournament magic, your advice is the proper response. But if, at a macro level, we want to be as inclusive as possible, I think the rules and culture have to change to suit that.
If we aren't intending Magic to be inclusive but want a culture of rules lawyering and gotchas and such, well, I'm not sure what's really gained by that. What good comes of allowing games to play out in a way that is counter to the game rules because of competition rules?
I guess it's possible that it results in fewer "feel" based decisions by judges since the rules attempt to be cut and dry but in practice it seems like Judges largely just do this anyway.
Really the best thing to do, regardless of REL, is to fully announce your modes, triggers, etc. I've had people reveal their hand to thoughtseize DESPITE me saying very clearly, "Thoughtseize targeting myself" because it is an unusual line most of the time. Bad decisions happen, but you should never assume that everyone involved knows how things work and you should protect yourself by being very clear in casting your spells / interacting with the game state.
As for "rules lawyering," it can happen, but often the feel bad comes from the player who was ruled against making some sort of error. I've had it happen to me and despite being upset about it, I adapted and recognized my error.
The rules lawyering arguments are interesting, but we are all really getting off topic from the state of the Modern Meta. Has anyone noticed any changes in the Metagame on modo since the daily reporting changes? I understand there's nothing official, but personal experience is all we'll have now.
So why should I not cut people off before they can announce modes, then say some random modes or imply that modes have been selected in hopes to confuse them?
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
no the caster of esper charm is making a error when not declaring the mode on casting; tap, tap, tap, esper charm? that means nothing if he isn't announcing the mode he is selecting then he is leaving himself open to getting screwed by the rules of the game.
People will cut you off before you can say what modes. Do we really want a contest of who can speak faster. The player casting the spell gets none of the reward and all of the punishment from this system. What if the casting player has a speech problem. Why are we rewarding this jump the gun behavior. So let's say my opponent casts cryptic command can I then name off half of the modal combinations in hopes they choose the wrong one
All you have to do is state that you haven't declared modes yet, a player cannot "force" you to make such a error it is in the rules that you do not have to accept a shortcut if you are the active player. Your totally wrong as about "the caster not getting any reward" etc... the caster can simply state I haven't declared modes yet and the other player has to wait, I mean you could get a slow play violation if your taking crazy long but the player with priority has Priority and they do not have to accept a 'shortcut' in casting etc.. that has to be mutually agreed on.
What your describing with Cryptic Command sounds nothing like the situation the poster put up with Esper charm, I mean if a person would really be so easily confused that simply stating potential combinations on Cryptic would cause them to lose sight of why they cast the card in the first place then IDK that is a level of ineptitude that I just personally can't see actually happening in a game of magic other than perhaps against a small child.
I know the Esper Charm thing came up for Cedric Phillips before and some people still think that it's scummy that he did it but it was a completely valid play. He even double checked with his opponent asking him "Target yourself?"
The awkward thing about Charm now in modern is that if you play against a player on Esper Goryo's them saying "Target me" might be them trying to angle shoot. There might be a situation where they have 2 Vengance's and Griselbrand in hand that they need to get online so saying "target me" is literally what they mean. Then again they might say "target me" waiting to see if you respond and if you don't they can go to draw cards because they changed their mind.
Because of this, I feel that if an opponent casts it and says "target me" that they have to discard, no questions asked. Before I respond I'll make sure to double check with a "target yourself?" for confirmation but if they say yes again then it means they want to discard.
That being said if this is like FNM or some other random weekend event then I don't really care and I know what they meant and just let them draw. It's casual, if they really want to scum me with something like that at FNM then they're only hurting themselves. FNM's are meant to be fun and it's best to try and not ruin the mood. I'd even say to an extent that GPT's and PPTQ's fall under this umbrella of being really casual.
Edit: Honestly the best thing to do is just to straight up ask them "Wait, which mode are you selecting?" to 100% clarify. If you are ever uncertain about something it's always best to get clarification from your opponent. Sometimes with all the shortcuts and fatigue we often assume too much which can lead to some awkward situations.
It sort of boggles my mind people try to defend the esper charm move. The opponent is purposefully cutting off the opponent from announcing their mode in hopes that an appeal to a judge gains him an advantage on a technicality. It's not a skilled technical play, it's not conducive to growth of the game, and it might not even be legal if you consider angle shooting and intentionally slow play considering you clearly know you're opponent isn't actively trying to hurt themselves. Pretending otherwise is just wrong on every level.
So why should I not cut people off before they can announce modes, then say some random modes in hopes to confuse them?
Because you don't have priority and you can't choose the modes for your opponent? Again the player casting charm needs to declare the mode ON CAST, as in "Cast Esper Charm choosing Draw 2." That is distinctly different from "Esper Charm?" w/ a pause for response. I have yet to see a situation where an opponent is interrupting the other player mid-sentence.
So why should I not cut people off before they can announce modes, then say some random modes in hopes to confuse them?
Because you don't have priority and you can't choose the modes for your opponent? Again the player casting charm needs to declare the mode ON CAST, as in "Cast Esper Charm choosing Draw 2." That is distinctly different from "Esper Charm?" w/ a pause for response. I have yet to see a situation where an opponent is interrupting the other player mid-sentence.
Does not having priority mean I can't speak before my opponent does and if it does is their actually a punishment for it? Why is the opponent allowed to imply modes have been selected with specific phrasing? Just because there was a pause in speaking for the casting player does that mean that the opponent gets to misrepresent the gamestate by implying a mode has been selected. No one has even addressed the if the caster has speech problem, disability issue or there is a language barrier. Frankly I'm over this we as a player base should not be reward misrepresented games states and opponents imply that a mode has been selected, this is part of the reason I don't play much any more and when I do it's on mtgo.
It sort of boggles my mind people try to defend the esper charm move. The opponent is purposefully cutting off the opponent from announcing their mode in hopes that an appeal to a judge gains him an advantage on a technicality. It's not a skilled technical play, it's not conducive to growth of the game, and it might not even be legal if you consider angle shooting and intentionally slow play considering you clearly know you're opponent isn't actively trying to hurt themselves. Pretending otherwise is just wrong on every level.
It depends on what is said. Saying "target me" is pretty vague and could be interpreted 2 ways (even if the rules say that it can only be taken one way). It also depends on how the opponent interprets it. They could try to angle shoot, or they could actually wonder if the opponent may want to discard 2 (I listed such an example). It's not about skill, this is all about clear communication which is something I have read many, many pros advocate more than anything (between that and calling a judge if unsure about anything). Sometimes it's about protecting yourself, others it is about the fault of one or both players for not being clear enough (and possibly misusing that to their advantage).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern URBSome variant of Death's Shadow URB Grixis Control (Chapin Version) JFM Storm / Treasure Cruise Delver / Splinter Twin / Infect
To maybe help wrap up this discussion on Angle Shooting vs The Rules of the Game, here's a link to an article by Cedric Phillips about an Esper charm situation which may have been the basis for the discussion. Philips plays reasonably within the rules and permits his opponents to make the mistakes they are going to make - nothing wrong with that.
That is a distinct situation from trying to prompt a player into making a mistake through confusing language/interruptions/questions.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
This whole Esper Charm thing has been a dumb conversation, but at least it wasn't about the banned list.
Yeah odd how the only true discussion in here in a long time doesn't belong in this thread at all. I'm amazed it wasn't moved actually.
Well, it did allow for some actual discussion with a myriad of viewpoints, compared with the usual passive-aggressiveness. I think everyone was happy to just talk about something else.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So you're willing to purposely ask a deceptive question to get an edge? Good to know. Personally would ask the player which mode but each to their own.
Legacy - LED Dredge, ANT & WDnT
This isn't a failure to read cards it's an opponent jumping the gun on choosing modes
I don't have any real difficulties with it myself since adopting an "announce everything" mentality - but it's really disturbing that people seek to gain edges on the other side of that by not announcing anything unless it's strictly required and trying to get people with vague interpretation of shortcuts and so on.
In my opinion everyone and everything should be working to create a good, fair game of Magic - the judges, rules and players. The first rule should be "What did the player intend?" and that should trump everything. When that is actually unclear, go to the complex rule structure, but if it's clear someone intended to draw 2 off esper charm, they draw 2 off esper charm ffs.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
I think you're looking at this the wrong way. I doubt Ashton is saying that he would do this. He's saying that players at Comp REL should be wary that these types of things can happen and prepare for it. All the player had to do was announce modes or if he was interrupted, he could just tell his opponent that he didn't announce modes yet.
At FNM, I get Inquistioned or Thoughtseized quite often. I usually ask my opponent who they are targeting, so that I don't reveal my hand in the case of something like targeting one's self, discarding Griselbrand for example. Most of the times, I know what my opponent's doing, but why not be 100% sure?
At a WNM last week, I was receiving an important text and during my upkeep my opponent went for Surgical Extraction on a card in my graveyard. I handed him the deck and immediately realized that I should have targeted myself with my Relic of Progenitus. Since I had already given my opponent the deck, I decided to live with the poor decision that I made while I was distracted. Yes, even at Regular REL, some players hold themselves to standards that they deem within their own reach. (I was pretty ashamed of myself the moment I handed him the deck.) Maybe these examples don't seem to corollate, but my point here is that you have to hold yourself to the highest playing standard if you are playing at Comp REL. I've seen it before...players doing their first PPTQ and getting handed to the wolves.
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)no the caster of esper charm is making a error when not declaring the mode on casting; tap, tap, tap, esper charm? that means nothing if he isn't announcing the mode he is selecting then he is leaving himself open to getting screwed by the rules of the game.
Now imagine if you had done this at comp Rel and instead you had simply touched your deck, then remembered that you needed to relic yourself and activated relic. Opponent called a judge and said you had touched your deck and assumed that meant you had passed priority and allowed surgical to resolve.
Unbeknownst to you there is a tourney rule that touching your deck is a shortcut for handing your deck to your opponent, rule 9273.1 Appendix Q.
That more closely approximates the way tournament magic rules lawyering occurs.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
What does "tap,tap, tap : esper charm" mean? the rules of the game state that the caster is supposed to declare the chosen mode at the time that you cast it, not to wait for your opponent to respond in some way. I mean if you say okay to "tap tap tap esper charm" you could just as easily say that the opponent allowed the spell to resolve and you simply announce the mode after fact?
If the esper charm caster had to learn the hard way that he needs to cast his spells properly than that is a painful lesson in technical play.
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
People will cut you off before you can say what modes. Do we really want a contest of who can speak faster. The player casting the spell gets none of the reward and all of the punishment from this system. What if the casting player has a speech problem. Why are we rewarding this jump the gun behavior. So let's say my opponent casts cryptic command can I then name off half of the modal combinations in hopes they choose the wrong one
If that's what he means then I apologise and completely agree. The best way to play magic (including at the kitchen table to ensure good habits) is to announce everything you're doing and ensure your opponent does the same.
Scumming opponents goes both ways ('thoughtseize' silence - reveal your hand 'oh no I'm discarding my griselbrand')
That's the main thing really we don't want to put off new players to any level of the game.
Legacy - LED Dredge, ANT & WDnT
Yeah, and what I'm saying is I think the game would be a better place if the expected situation is that everyone is trying to achieve fairness first and victory second. Instead of making and doggedly enforcing stupid rules like this (see the Old "go to Combat" shortcut) we should all strive to achieve a fairness.
The mental game of magic should be about what cards your opponent has and what plays they can make, not about whether someone accidentally says a wrong word that maps to a shortcut buried in the depths of the rules compendium.
I have no issue following comp-rel rules myself from a capability perspective but I think the game would be better if this attitude changed culturally. It's utterly toxic.
Edit:
Again, I agree that on a personal level your goal is to get good at tournament magic, your advice is the proper response. But if, at a macro level, we want to be as inclusive as possible, I think the rules and culture have to change to suit that.
If we aren't intending Magic to be inclusive but want a culture of rules lawyering and gotchas and such, well, I'm not sure what's really gained by that. What good comes of allowing games to play out in a way that is counter to the game rules because of competition rules?
I guess it's possible that it results in fewer "feel" based decisions by judges since the rules attempt to be cut and dry but in practice it seems like Judges largely just do this anyway.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
As for "rules lawyering," it can happen, but often the feel bad comes from the player who was ruled against making some sort of error. I've had it happen to me and despite being upset about it, I adapted and recognized my error.
All you have to do is state that you haven't declared modes yet, a player cannot "force" you to make such a error it is in the rules that you do not have to accept a shortcut if you are the active player. Your totally wrong as about "the caster not getting any reward" etc... the caster can simply state I haven't declared modes yet and the other player has to wait, I mean you could get a slow play violation if your taking crazy long but the player with priority has Priority and they do not have to accept a 'shortcut' in casting etc.. that has to be mutually agreed on.
What your describing with Cryptic Command sounds nothing like the situation the poster put up with Esper charm, I mean if a person would really be so easily confused that simply stating potential combinations on Cryptic would cause them to lose sight of why they cast the card in the first place then IDK that is a level of ineptitude that I just personally can't see actually happening in a game of magic other than perhaps against a small child.
The awkward thing about Charm now in modern is that if you play against a player on Esper Goryo's them saying "Target me" might be them trying to angle shoot. There might be a situation where they have 2 Vengance's and Griselbrand in hand that they need to get online so saying "target me" is literally what they mean. Then again they might say "target me" waiting to see if you respond and if you don't they can go to draw cards because they changed their mind.
Because of this, I feel that if an opponent casts it and says "target me" that they have to discard, no questions asked. Before I respond I'll make sure to double check with a "target yourself?" for confirmation but if they say yes again then it means they want to discard.
That being said if this is like FNM or some other random weekend event then I don't really care and I know what they meant and just let them draw. It's casual, if they really want to scum me with something like that at FNM then they're only hurting themselves. FNM's are meant to be fun and it's best to try and not ruin the mood. I'd even say to an extent that GPT's and PPTQ's fall under this umbrella of being really casual.
Edit: Honestly the best thing to do is just to straight up ask them "Wait, which mode are you selecting?" to 100% clarify. If you are ever uncertain about something it's always best to get clarification from your opponent. Sometimes with all the shortcuts and fatigue we often assume too much which can lead to some awkward situations.
URB Some variant of Death's Shadow
URB Grixis Control (Chapin Version)
JFM Storm / Treasure Cruise Delver / Splinter Twin / InfectCommander/EDH
This pile of cards when I feel like it
Death's Shadow discord link
Affinity
Death & Taxes
Mardu Nahiri
Forcing people to merge with twitch is stupid
Because you don't have priority and you can't choose the modes for your opponent? Again the player casting charm needs to declare the mode ON CAST, as in "Cast Esper Charm choosing Draw 2." That is distinctly different from "Esper Charm?" w/ a pause for response. I have yet to see a situation where an opponent is interrupting the other player mid-sentence.
Does not having priority mean I can't speak before my opponent does and if it does is their actually a punishment for it? Why is the opponent allowed to imply modes have been selected with specific phrasing? Just because there was a pause in speaking for the casting player does that mean that the opponent gets to misrepresent the gamestate by implying a mode has been selected. No one has even addressed the if the caster has speech problem, disability issue or there is a language barrier. Frankly I'm over this we as a player base should not be reward misrepresented games states and opponents imply that a mode has been selected, this is part of the reason I don't play much any more and when I do it's on mtgo.
It depends on what is said. Saying "target me" is pretty vague and could be interpreted 2 ways (even if the rules say that it can only be taken one way). It also depends on how the opponent interprets it. They could try to angle shoot, or they could actually wonder if the opponent may want to discard 2 (I listed such an example). It's not about skill, this is all about clear communication which is something I have read many, many pros advocate more than anything (between that and calling a judge if unsure about anything). Sometimes it's about protecting yourself, others it is about the fault of one or both players for not being clear enough (and possibly misusing that to their advantage).
URB Some variant of Death's Shadow
URB Grixis Control (Chapin Version)
JFM Storm / Treasure Cruise Delver / Splinter Twin / InfectCommander/EDH
This pile of cards when I feel like it
Death's Shadow discord link
That is a distinct situation from trying to prompt a player into making a mistake through confusing language/interruptions/questions.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
Yeah odd how the only true discussion in here in a long time doesn't belong in this thread at all. I'm amazed it wasn't moved actually.
Well, it did allow for some actual discussion with a myriad of viewpoints, compared with the usual passive-aggressiveness. I think everyone was happy to just talk about something else.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."