PDA

View Full Version : Fetch lands in mono-colored decks?



Versus
08-17-2007, 02:46 PM
I guess this really isn't a rules question, but I couldn't think of any other forum to post it in.

Tithe and Thawing Glaciers were always two of my favorite cards for thinning and finding mana in my decks from the past. While reaclimating myself I see that these "fetch" lands are all the rage and understandably so. Amazing for multicolored decks, but you already knew that.

My mind still seems trapped in the MTG of the past so some of my reasoning doesn't translate well today, but all my senses are telling me the answer to my question is YES! I'll ask it anyway...

Would Fetch Lands be considered beneficial to a mono colored deck and if yes, how many would you run? Would you still folllow the 2-1 ratio and take out one basic land for 2 Fetch?

KillemallCFH
08-17-2007, 03:12 PM
It really depends on the deck. If you use Goyf, Rotting Giant, or Jotun Grunt you are going to want that land in your graveyard, so fetchlands are good to play. If you play Sensei's Divining Top or Brainstorm, you are going to want fetchlands for their shuffle effect.
However, fetchlands are not always good. Many monocolored decks have no real use for fetchlands. The minor deck thinning usually isn't worth the 1 life, not to mention the chance of being stifled (In my opinion).
In a deck that really wants them, I'd run the full 8. In a deck that might need them for 1 card, I'd run 4 - 6.

Versus
08-17-2007, 03:39 PM
Yeah the shuffle effect is optimal next to mana retrival in multicolored. I guess they also help to reach threshold faster and all sorts of other tricks I'm ignorant of.

I do run Rotting Giants, but only 2 simply because I don't wanna get screwed. Spending $50 just to be able to run 3 or 4 isn't a priority for me right now. I was simply going to use them for possible better draws (not running Confidant) to thin things out a bit and not slow the tempo down.

zulander
08-17-2007, 03:41 PM
I'd agree that ~6 is a good number. The deck thinning helps a ton in longer drawn out games against control so it can also be a metagame call.

Nihil Credo
08-17-2007, 06:00 PM
Mathemagics: Onslaught Fetchlands (http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/print.asp?ID=3096)

Short version: the deck-thinning effect of fetchlands is roughly comparable to paying 4 life to draw an extra card, and such a trade is achieved on average around turn 25. Therefore, the thinning effect alone is not reason enough to run fetches.

from Cairo
08-17-2007, 07:19 PM
Yea they are definitely worth it if there is any synergy in your deck regarding land/cards in the graveyard or/and shuffle effects. Paying 1 life for a shuffle in conjunction with library manipulation or an extra card type for Goyf/card toward Threshold is going to be worth it. If you deck doesn't have any need for shuffling or building up its graveyard its probably better to run w/o them and leave you less susceptible to Stifle.

Versus
08-18-2007, 07:27 AM
Mathemagics: Onslaught Fetchlands (http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/print.asp?ID=3096)


That sums it up nicely. Well at least if I'm thinking wrong there are many others who thought like wise or there wouldn't be such an article. Very interesting site btw, thanks!

Cairo, (Killemall mentioned it as well as the article) I'm not familiar with the term "Stifle"?

Nihil Credo
08-18-2007, 07:51 AM
Cairo, (Killemall mentioned it as well as the article) I'm not familiar with the term "Stifle"?

Stifle - U
Instant (Rare, from Scourge)
Counter target activated or triggered ability.

It's a pretty effective card in Legacy, and one of the main reasons for it is that Stifling a fetchland activation (thereby preventing you from searching a land) is, in a Sourcer's immortal words, "what would happen if Time Walk and Stone Rain had sex... and Lava Dart watched".

Versus
08-18-2007, 08:07 AM
HAHA! Okay, I thought it was term like "burn" or "ping". This countering effect from Stifle is only until the end of the current turn though?

Nihil Credo
08-18-2007, 08:26 AM
HAHA! Okay, I thought it was term like "burn" or "ping". This countering effect from Stifle is only until the end of the current turn though?
It's a response, it works just like countering a spell.

Opponent - I activate my Polluted Delta's ability: I pay its costs (tap the Delta, sacrifice it, and pay 1 life), and the ability "Search your library for (etc)" is put on the stack. Then I pass priority.
Me - I play Stifle targeting the ability, then I pass priority.
Opponent - Why do you hate me so much? I've got no countermagic, so I guess I pass priority.
The Game - Stifle resolves, the Polluted Delta's ability is countered and goes to Hell.

Versus
08-18-2007, 08:40 AM
Ohhhhhh, nice! I wasn't taking into consideration that the "Cost" was sacrificing. So this would work against removing counters on a Jitte or the sacrificing of a Fanatic as well, their cost is a one time only and lost forever.

In other instances say on Belcher you could use it to stop the Charbelcher from going off with you're opps. :3: already spent, but they would be able to activate the ability next turn, right? I was thinking for a second that Stifle could stop it indeffinatly like Pithing Needle, then I realized that would be the best spell in the galaxy!

Nihil Credo
08-18-2007, 09:12 AM
Yes to both. The rule is that everything before the colon is the cost, everything after the colon is the effect.

Also, the rule for estabilish what can be hit by Stifle is the following (if you follow the latest Oracle text):

- A piece of text is a triggered ability if and only if it begins with "When", "Wherever", or "At".
- A piece of text is an activated ability if and only if it is written in the format "(Pay cost): (Effect)".

Versus
08-18-2007, 11:40 AM
That clears up a lot, thanks.

I understand how it works when the cost is a sacrifice or payment by tapping, but how would Stifle effect an activated abilty that can be used more than once per turn, say the pumping of a creature on the stack?

Lets say I'm attacking with a Shade and pump him for 2 then my opp. uses Stifle and I pump for 2 more. The last 2 on the stack would still resolve, yes?

We discussed the countering of the activated ability for Jitte, but when would the opponent Stifle the triggered ability here, before an attack was made?

I guess I'm still not getting if the effect is over the entire turn or is it just on the current phases stack, resolves, then goes back to normal.

Nihil Credo
08-18-2007, 12:34 PM
Every activation of an ability creates a single Activated Ability object on the stack. So if you pump a Shade fifteen times without passing priority (i.e. without waiting for each activation to resolve before playing the ability again) there will be fifteen separated Activated Abilities on the stack, each of which will read "Nantuko Shade gets +1/+1 until end of turn."

Stifle, unlike the old Interdict, does not care at all about the permanent that originated the ability. It only deals with (i.e. counters) its target object on the stack. So in the above example, if your opponent plays Stifle, he will choose its target among the fifteen Activated Abilities on the stack, and when Stifle resolves, only that one will be countered. The other fourteen, and clearly any other you may play afterwards, will be unaffected.

Hope that was clear enough.

Regarding the timing rules for Jitte, the triggered ability says "Whenever equipped creature deals combat damage, put two charge counters on Umezawa’s Jitte". Like all triggered abilities, it is put on the stack immediately after its trigger condition is met, that is, immediately after combat damage is dealt.

Remember (I thought this was mentioned in the other thread) that combat damage is also an object on the stack; it is put there after each player passes priority after blockers are declared. This is called assigning combat damage. Once both players have passed priority while the damage is on the stack, Combat Damage resolves and creatures or players suffer the appropriate amount of damage. This is called dealing damage, and it is this that triggers the Jitte.

(All creatures' damage form a single object on the stack.)

So, here's a formal example of how the game handles this combat phase: I want attack with a Jitte-wielding Grizzly Bears, as well as a Hill Giant, against your empty board. We have both just passed priority during my first main phase, so we enter the combat phase.

Game - Begins BEGINNING OF COMBAT STEP. You may play spells or abilities now.
Me - I pass priority.
You - I pass priority.
Game - All players have passed priority and the stack is empty. The current step ends. You may not play spells or abilities now.

Game - Begins DECLARE ATTACKERS STEP. Attacking player, what creatures do you want to attack with?
Me - Grizzly Bears and Hill Giant
Game - Grizzly Bears and Hill Giant are now tapped and attacking.
Game - You may play spells or abilities now.
Me - I pass priority.
You - I pass priority.
Game - All players have passed priority and the stack is empty. The current step ends. You may not play spells or abilities now.

Game - Begins DECLARE BLOCKERS STEP. Defending player has no creatures able to block.
Game - You may play spells or abilities now.
Me - I pass priority.
You - I pass priority.
Game - All players have passed priority and the stack is empty. The current step ends. You may not play spells or abilities now.

Game - Begins COMBAT DAMAGE STEP. Two damage from Grizzly Bears and three damage from Hill Giant are assigned to Defending Players and are put on the stack.
Game - You may play spells or abilities now.
Me - I pass priority.
You - I pass priority.
Game - All players have passed priority: the top object on the stack resolves. You may not play spells or abilities now.
Game - Combat Damage resolves, and Defending Player is dealt 2 damage from Grizzly Bears and 3 damage from Hill Giant. Defending Player's life total is reduced by 5.
Game - Triggered ability detected! Umezawa's Jitte's triggered ability is put on the stack.
Game - You may now play spells or abilities.
Me - I pass priority
You - I pass priority
Game - All players have passed priority: the top object on the stack resolves. You may not play spells or abilities now.
Game - Umezawa's Jitte's triggered ability resolves, and 2 charge counters are put on Umezawa's Jitte.
Game - You may now play spells or abilities.
Me - I pass priority.
You - I pass priority.
Game - All players have passed priority and the stack is empty. The current step ends. You may not play spells or abilities now.

Game - Begins END OF COMBAT STEP.
You may play spells or abilities now.
Me - I pass priority.
You - I pass priority.
Game - All players have passed priority and the stack is empty. The current step ends. You may not play spells or abilities now.

Game - Begins SECOND MAIN PHASE

That was longer than I thought. Good thing we shortcut through most of that, huh?

Versus
08-19-2007, 08:00 AM
Damn, is that realistic though? Have the rules gotten that intense or is that example what was always happening just broken down to be more precise? I've said before the way we used to do it would look something like this:

Me: Attacking with Grizzy Bears and Hill Giant.
You: I'll take it.
Me: Take 5. Your turn.

At any time during this example both players would be allowed all the options of playing any and all spells or abilities during the individual phases given in your example. However, in this case the defending player from the beginning of the attack knows he has nothing to block with and nothing in hand to stop the imminent damage so he just passes on all fronts and cuts right to the chase.

I guess that's not the proper way to do it now, but if it really has to go down like that while playing every turn it seems a bit tedious.



(Reguarding Stifle)Hope that was clear enough.


Completely. Thank you.

DeathwingZERO
08-19-2007, 08:12 AM
Most games will be pretty cut and dry, and once you pick up on the stack and priority it's basically second nature. It looks complicated when explaining it to someone, but it's natural progression when your actually playing.

And thanks for the article, Nihil. I've always wondered just how much the thinning of the decks the fetches really did, but was too lazy to try any of the math involved :D

Nihil Credo
08-19-2007, 09:04 AM
Damn, is that realistic though? Have the rules gotten that intense or is that example what was always happening just broken down to be more precise? I've said before the way we used to do it would look something like this:

Me: Attacking with Grizzy Bears and Hill Giant.
You: I'll take it.
Me: Take 5. Your turn.

At any time during this example both players would be allowed all the options of playing any and all spells or abilities during the individual phases given in your example. However, in this case the defending player from the beginning of the attack knows he has nothing to block with and nothing in hand to stop the imminent damage so he just passes on all fronts and cuts right to the chase.

I guess that's not the proper way to do it now, but if it really has to go down like that while playing every turn it seems a bit tedious.

Actually, that is how it's shortcut these days as well. People only go through these kind of steps when there are important interactions to consider - Limited is by heaps and bounds the best way to learn all the secrets of the combat phase. Look out for my soon-to be published book, Everything I always wanted to know about the timing rules I learnt from Devouring Rage.

In general, you just say something like "I attack, take 5" if there is no reason to expect actions from your opponent. If he has a Twiddle in hand to tap your creature during Beginning of Combat, it is expected of him to tell you as soon as you move to attack; if you just placed your guy in the Red Zone without giving him time to declare, he'll just tell you "Wait, I have something to do in Beginning of Combat" and the game will be rewinded.

On the other hand, if he has something like an Icy Manipulator in play, then it's good etiquette (and possibly tournament rules, I'm not sure about it) to explicitly play out the Beginning of Combat step as described above. It's also good tactics, since if there is a complicated ground stall you don't want to give him extra information on what creature to tap with the artifact. Maybe he was going to tap a creature you weren't going to attack with anyway.

Versus
08-19-2007, 02:10 PM
Whew, thank god! As DWZERO pointed out it becomes second nature. I've never been faulted for how I've played in the past so it's still likely inherent in my own game play. I just thought they for a second it HAD to be drawn out like that now. I'd need to bring an index card with all the steps listed to make sure I pass priority at all the right times!

Thanks for all the help and taking the time to explain everything thoroughly.

Nightmare
08-20-2007, 10:10 AM
Thanks for all the help and taking the time to explain everything thoroughly.
It's awesome that everyone is answering these questions so thouroughly, but at the same time, it's just as awesome that you're asking. At some point, maybe today, I plan to gather up all these questions and merge them into a stickied thread. Legacy is the format where people are most likely to look when picking up the game after a long hiatus (they can still use their old cards), and a resource like the one you're unintentionally providing is great for that.

So, in other words, thanks, and keep asking questions!

Versus
08-20-2007, 01:23 PM
Glad I could help. I'm very grateful that the folks here are so forthcoming and don't make me feel like I'm being a burden. My skills are rusty as hell right now, but hopefully in the near future I can contribute to some of the answering as well as the asking.

Ridiculous Hat
08-21-2007, 12:50 PM
It depends on the level you play at, but I would say that slowing down the game a little bit to be more technical would be to everyone's benefit. For example, here's what I usually say when I want to attack--

"Declare attackers." Wait for opponent to confirm.
Make my attacks. Wait for opponent to confirm/respond.
After he's made blocks or responded or whatever, ask "stack damage?" Wait for opponent to confirm.
After damage is stacked, ask "damage resolves?" Wait for opponent to confirm.

This whole exchange usually takes about 20 seconds, so while it may seem like a lot to say compared to normal shortcuts, I find it helpful to make sure things are clear and both players think they're in the same step.

Versus
09-11-2007, 07:11 AM
Game - Begins BEGINNING OF COMBAT STEP

Game - Begins DECLARE ATTACKERS STEP.

Game - Begins DECLARE BLOCKERS STEP.

Game - Begins COMBAT DAMAGE STEP.
Me - I pass priority.
You - Smother

Game - Begins END OF COMBAT STEP.

Game - Begins SECOND MAIN PHASE

I just wanted to double check a stack occurence with you. Given your example, is where I denoted the right place to play my removal? This will give me the opportunity to have my opponent possibly expend another card on something like Might of Old Krosa or Giant Growth, correct?

Or as Ridiculous Hat pointed out, let them attack, and do whatever they want then when I play Smother announce "Before combat damage resolves..."

I think sometimes I'm quick too quick to Smother the thing RIGHT after it's declared an attacker and then I'll get hit with the pump spell on the next turns attack.

In otherwords, I should just state "I'm not declaring blockers", then priority is passed to them again to play the spells. If they DO, I Smother. IF they DONT I can Smother or let damage resolve. If I do let the damage resolve that's it, they cannot attempt the pump this turn again, right?

Nihil Credo
09-11-2007, 09:28 AM
You should pass priority during the Declare Blockers step (i.e. after declaring "No block"). At this point, if they play a pump spell, you can Smother in response and 2-for-1 them. However, if they just pass priority without playing anything, the Combat Damage step will begin and damage will be put on the stack. Because at this point combat damage exists independently, neither pumping nor killing the creature will affect the amount of damage you'll take.

Versus
09-11-2007, 09:55 AM
Oh ok. So the only way to be SURE to prevent ANY damage would be to kill his creature durring my priority of the declare blockers step. Once I pass it back the damage WILL happen. Unless of course he plays the pump and I can 2-1. Otherwise it's too late to respond with a Smother durring the Combat Damage Phase. I could still kill the creature, but the damage is done.

Durring the Combat Phase he cannot pump the creature to cause more damage, only to protect his from dying had I blocked with a higher power creature.

In otherwords the last time you can pump a creature to cause combat damage would be durring the declare blockers step.

The last time you can pump a creature to save it from lethal combat damage is before the damage reslolves in the Combat Damage step.

I've probably asked all that before in Jitte thread I made a few weeks back and am starting to sound like a broken record. I just like to state things to be perfectly clear, don't mind me.

nitewolf9
09-11-2007, 10:23 AM
1: Beginning of Combat:
Instants can be played. This is the last chance for the defending player
to tap creatures in order to prevent them from attacking.

2: Declare Attackers:
The active player declares which creatures are attacking, then taps them
and pays any other costs for them to attack. Then Instants can be played.
This is the last chance for the attacking player to tap or destroy
creatures in order to prevent them from blocking.

3: Declare Blockers
The defending player declares which creatures are blocking which. Then
Instants can be played. This is the last time when changing a creature's
power, or destroying a creature, will change the amount of damage it can deal.

4: Combat Damage
Combat Damage from surviving creatures is assigned to the creatures
they're fighting, in whatever pattern their controllers want. Then Instants
can be played. This is a good time to play damage-prevention or redirection
abilities, and it's the last chance to increase a creature's toughness in
order to let it survive.
Then the damage will resolve, and lethally damaged creatures will die,
and players on 0 life will lose the game. Then Instants can be played
again. At this point it's too late to do anything very useful, except
killing creatures in order to prevent their "at end of combat" abilities
from happening.

Note that if creatures with First Strike are involved, the Combat Damage
step will actually happen twice- in the first one, only creatures with
first strike will deal damage. In the second one, only the creatures that
haven't already dealt their damage will do so.

5: End of Combat
Abilities that trigger "at end of combat" will do so, and go onto the
stack. Then Instants can be played.

Versus
09-11-2007, 10:29 AM
Wow, I was actually right!

Thanks again both of you. I appreciate it.

Versus
11-05-2007, 05:29 PM
I don't want to make a seperate thread showing everyone how stupid I am, so I'll do it right here as it pertains to the Combat Phase and the conversation from two months ago

Say I'm attacking with two 4/5 Goyfs. My opponent is at 11 life and I hold a Bolt in my hand. I want both of Goyfs damage to go through. He has one 3/3 creature untapped in which to block.

I declare both Goyfs attacking, no responce. I turn them sideways and attack. He blocks one of the Goyfs with the 3/3. Am I not allowed to Bolt his creature before the block is made??? In other words once he begins to slide his card forward I can no longer respond?

I was under the impression that I had the opportunity to respond, the reason for waiting to Bolt was to see how he would react to my attack. I played a game the other day and when he went to block I destroyed his creature and said "you take 8", he replied with "No, I take 4" the block sticks.

Of course I reread this thread and realized I was remiss about this:


2: Declare Attackers:
The active player declares which creatures are attacking, then taps them
and pays any other costs for them to attack. Then Instants can be played.
This is the last chance for the attacking player to tap or destroy
creatures in order to prevent them from blocking.

So I guess my question is, why do this in Combat at all? What is the benefit of destroying his available blockers in the Combat Phase and not before declaring attackers? I swear I've done this in the past. Maybe I was doing it during the Attack Step and everyone I played assumed I was and put their creature in the yard and took their damage?

Van Phanel
11-05-2007, 06:39 PM
A simple reason would be an Avatar of Woe (http://www.mercadia.de/home/page.php?site=inter/mpf/viewthread&id=415462&bp=1) with vigilance (for whatever reason). You declare the Avatar as attacker and then tap it to kill a potential blocker before giving your opponent an opportunity to block.

If you had tapped it earlier, you'd have no chance to attack with it, as it would be tapped.


The example you told us about is the exact reason to be more precise in combat than most people are: If he had simply asked: "declare block?" before moving his hand, you wouldn't have had any additional information about his intention to block as he could always have declared no blocks.

If he just blocks it might become a problem as he probably thinks you passed priority even though you didn't. It becomes a judging issue from here, however that could have easily been avoided with being a little bit more technically correct.


I don't want to make a seperate thread showing everyone how stupid I am...

There are no stupid questions only stupid answers.

Well... there are stupid questions. Yours aren't however. :smile:

DeathwingZERO
11-05-2007, 06:46 PM
Hitting them in the main phase gives away part of your tactics. For example, let's say you hit the creature in main phase, and then wanted to go into combat. They tap both your Goyf's, and your out a turn of combat, and a Bolt that took out a creature that they might just as easily replace next turn, with no damage done to them.

However, if you waited for combat, you now make the choice harder on their point. They would have to choose whether or not they believe your going to kill the creature before it blocks, or if your even swinging with both. This in a way puts it greatly in your favor, as you can continue to go through your steps until the end of attackers declared step, then pull out the Bolt against them, hitting them for 8, and removing the creature, which was your original plan.

And yes, as long as you hit the creature before the "declare blockers" step, all 8 damage would go through. The difference of one step (you attacking, him blocking), is negligible to you. All you want to do is hit for 8, make sure he has no tricks prior to getting into combat, and kill his creature. Waiting is the best way to accomplish it.

Versus
11-05-2007, 08:00 PM
Thanks for the replies guys.

So basically what I questioned before about taking each step seperatly being
time consuming has now bit me in the ass. The steps became blurred in the above example and I assumed I still had priority to kill his creature before the actual block took place.

The whole thing threw me off balance and I lost the game. I ended up wasting the Bolt on a 3/3 that would have suffered lethal combat damage from Goyf anyway and only got 4 damage through.


There are no stupid questions only stupid answers.

Thanks, but damn did I feel stupid. I've been going through it
in my head over and over wondering why it the situation never arose
before. I know I must have attempted to do what I did at some point since I started playing again and no one ever called me on it. I don't even recall anyone ever asking, "declare blockers?", they all just slide their card forward and block.

DeathwingZERO
11-05-2007, 10:15 PM
Thanks for the replies guys.

So basically what I questioned before about taking each step seperatly being
time consuming has now bit me in the ass. The steps became blurred in the above example and I assumed I still had priority to kill his creature before the actual block took place.

The whole thing threw me off balance and I lost the game. I ended up wasting the Bolt on a 3/3 that would have suffered lethal combat damage from Goyf anyway and only got 4 damage through.



Thanks, but damn did I feel stupid. I've been going through it
in my head over and over wondering why it the situation never arose
before. I know I must have attempted to do what I did at some point since I started playing again and no one ever called me on it. I don't even recall anyone ever asking, "declare blockers?", they all just slide their card forward and block.

To be fair, all you really had to say was "I never passed priority after declaring my attackers, you jumped the gun". Chances are if it came down to it, whoever was judging would have probably sided with you when you said exactly what you were planning on doing, which is pretty cut and dry.

Maveric78f
11-06-2007, 03:30 AM
Mathemagics: Onslaught Fetchlands (http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/print.asp?ID=3096)

Short version: the deck-thinning effect of fetchlands is roughly comparable to paying 4 life to draw an extra card, and such a trade is achieved on average around turn 25. Therefore, the thinning effect alone is not reason enough to run fetches.

Well, I d'ont agree with this conclusion. I don't agree neither with most of the conclusions of this article. While the study looks sound, the interpretation is highly subjective. Paying 4 life in order to draw a card is often worth, and it's not really dependant on what you are playing but most of all in what you are facing. Against Gob, burn or sligh, it's stupid. Against combo, controle it's clever. Against aggro-control, well, it depends on your deck (will you play control or aggro ?).

The trade is achieved on average turn 25 OK, but it does not mean that it does not show up before. Expectation is turn 25 but it does not mean that it's useless if your game plan does not lead you to reach the turn 25. A more interesting curve that was missing from the article is the average cost of the additionnal card given the turn where you are, id est the average cost of fetching divided by the average of additionnal card drawn given a turn. It's easy to compute symbolically at turn 2 for instance with 20 lands : 1/(40/58 - 40/59) = 85,55 : ouch.

According to me, the main reason not to play fetches in monocoloured decks is different though :
1/ Stifle
2/ Monocolour decks often play library manipulation : ringleader, messenger, scrying, brainstorm, sensei's divining top => they are the main motivation for playing or not fetchlands
3/ The life loss is often not justified (article subject)
4/ Random hate : Moon/needle/extirpate

Lego
11-06-2007, 01:10 PM
There are two things that I noticed no one addressed in this thread, even if they are pretty old. Since it was necroed, I'll address them now.


Would you still follow the 2-1 ratio and take out one basic land for 2 Fetch?

No. One fetch land is one land. Yes, it thins your deck by a tiny amount, but it's still one land. It costs your land drop, and puts a land into play untapped. If you have 22 basic lands and you want to replace some with fetches, 16 lands and 6 fetches is functionally the same thing.


I'd need to bring an index card with all the steps listed to make sure I pass priority at all the right times!

I know it was just a joke, but in case you didn't know, bringing outside notes to a tournament match is illegal. It's Cheating - Outside Assistance, and results in DQ without prize at any REL level.

Versus
11-06-2007, 02:42 PM
To be fair, all you really had to say was "I never passed priority after declaring my attackers, you jumped the gun". Chances are if it came down to it, whoever was judging would have probably sided with you when you said exactly what you were planning on doing, which is pretty cut and dry.

I should have, but it just threw me. I got totally derailed thinking I knew what I was doing and I apparently didn't. I do now. Hopefully.


I know it was just a joke, but in case you didn't know, bringing outside notes to a tournament match is illegal. It's Cheating - Outside Assistance, and results in DQ without prize at any REL level.

You are allowed to take them durring the game though, yes? As long as you aren't delaying that game you can write down whatever you want?


CAn I just run one more Combat/Stack example by you guys to make absolute sure I do know the correct procedure?

-I attack with a 4/5 Goyf. My opponent has a 4/5 Goyf in play. We move to declare blockers. He blocks my Goyf with his. I have a Nameless Inversion (+3/-3) I use it on his Goyf to make it a 7/1. Move to Combat damage Step. My Goyf deals 4 damage to his 7/1 (dead) and his Goyf deals 7 damage to my 4/5 (dead).

-I attack with a 4/5 Goyf. My opponent has a 4/5 Goyf in play. We move to declare blockers. He blocks my Goyf with his. I pass priority. He passes priority. Combat Damage step begins. I announce, "Damage on the Stack..." and play Nameless Inversion. His Goyf becomes a 7/1. My Goyf deals 4 damage to his 7/1 (dead), but his Goyf only deals 4 to my 4/5 as damage was already determined in the declare blockers step and power levels changing now will NOT effect damage dealt. Result my Goyf lives.

Would this be a good example of why doing the very same thing can yeild different results or am I totally wrong again?

Jaynel
11-06-2007, 02:50 PM
You're correct in both instances. One combat damage is stacked, any power/toughness changes will not influence the damage that's on the stack and waiting to be dealt after it resolves.

Versus
11-06-2007, 02:53 PM
You're correct in both instances. One combat damage is stacked, any power/toughness changes will not influence the damage that's on the stack and waiting to be dealt after it resolves.

Well, wait. If toughness still cannot be affected then both Goyfs would trade?

Nightmare
11-06-2007, 02:54 PM
This is similar to doing the following:

You have an Aquamoeba in play, and your opponent has a 2/2 in play. You attack, he declares his 2/2 to block.

You: Before Damage, I discard CardX to switch Aquamoeba's p/t.
Him: OK.
You: With damage on the stack, I discard CardZ to switch Aquamoeba's p/t.
Him: OK.

Result - Aquamoeba deals 3 damage, recieves 2 damage, and survives the attack.

Versus
11-06-2007, 03:12 PM
Ah, okay. So to break that down even further:

Aquamoeba is a 1/3 attacker. Your opponent blocks. Declare Blockers step begins (the last time when changing a creature's power will change the amount of damage it can deal.) you discard a card to make it a 3/1.

Damage Step begins (the last chance to increase a creature's toughness in order to let it survive.) With damage on the stack you discard a card to switch P/T again making Aquamoeba a 1/3. He deals his 3 damage determined in the Declare Blockers step to the 2/2, receives his 2 damage and survives.

I think I finally get it. The thing I wanted to be absolute about is with say Nameless Inversion. I'm not increasing toughness to save MY creature, but reducing toughness to kill his. That's still a legal play?

TrialByFire
11-06-2007, 03:53 PM
Your two scenarios with the Tarmogoyfs above are both correct.

I also just wanted to note to you that damage is determined at the beginning of the Combat Damage step in the Combat Phase. As soon as both players pass priority successively in the end of the Declare Blockers step, you proceed straight to the Combat Damage step and Combat Damage is assigned and put on the stack. Then players can play spells and abilities. So with the both 4/5 Goyfs dealing 4 damage on the stack, you Inversion his and make it a 7/2. As long as he passes priority to you with no responses and then you pass also, the Inversion will resolve, priorities get passed again, then the Combat Damage will resolve resulting in 4 damage to your 4/5 Goyf, and 4 damage to his 7/2 Goyf. This would cause his Goyf to go to the graveyard as a state-based effect (having lethal damage on it) the next time a player would get priority (which would be right after the Combat Damage on the stack is finished resolving).

That's pretty much the play-by-play of what happens

Versus
11-06-2007, 05:39 PM
Cool, thanks TrialByFire.

I didn't mean to doubt your word Jaynel, but the part of your reply I put in bold confused me. Just wanted to make double sure before I attempted it.

Thanks again to everyone for taking the time to clear that up for me.

Lego
11-06-2007, 06:33 PM
You are allowed to take them durring the game though, yes? As long as you aren't delaying that game you can write down whatever you want?

You can write down whatever you want during a match, yes. You can refer to those notes throughout the match (you can write a list of cards in hand when you Duress him, and then refer to it while you are sideboarding or when you cast Cabal Therapy in game 2, for instance) but you cannot bring them to the next match. Be careful, because often you'll write notes down about one match on the paper you're keeping your life totals on, and then bring that same paper with you to the next match. Make sure to switch sheets between matches.

Cait_Sith
11-06-2007, 10:41 PM
On the topic of notes:

Notes you take you are not permitted to hide from your opponent. If you write down your top 3 cards off of Sensei's Divining Top, you must show them to your opponent.

Lego
11-06-2007, 11:32 PM
Notes you take you are not permitted to hide from your opponent. If you write down your top 3 cards off of Sensei's Divining Top, you must show them to your opponent.

Well, you're not permitted to hide them, but you don't have to show them to your opponent unless they ask.

midnightAce
11-07-2007, 03:59 AM
On the topic of notes:

Notes you take you are not permitted to hide from your opponent. If you write down your top 3 cards off of Sensei's Divining Top, you must show them to your opponent.

I never knew about this.

Let me understand this properly: when you activate Top, and take notes to help you remember what was on the top, this note, must be shared with the opponent if they request it? Your library, hidden from the opponent then becomes public knowledge, that's highly counterintuitive.

Another issue then arises -- if the above is true, then what about false note making? Activate Top, scribble down "FoW, Counterspell, Mana Leak", oh, you want to see my notes? Here you go. (Jedi mind trick ftw?)

If anybody can explain this in more detail, that would be much appreciated. I will try to go through the DCI floor rules and see what I can come up.

cdr
11-07-2007, 07:46 AM
Notes are not public information. You do not have to show your opponent notes that you take during the match.

This is currently only in policy, but it's supposedly going to make it into the Universal Tournament Rules at some point.

The Penalty guidelines cover outside notes (Section 153, Cheating - Outside Assistance). You can be DQed for outside notes.


Notes made during a match may be referenced during that match or between matches. Notes made outside the current match may not be referenced once a player has sat for their match until after their match is completed.

The only exception that's sometimes made is having the "Oracle" text of your cards, but that should be OKed by the head judge beforehand.

The fear of outside notes is pretty much the sole reason they don't let you write notes in 2HG. Pretty silly in my opinion.

The Universal Tournament Rules section on notes:


28. Taking Notes
Players are allowed to take brief written notes regarding the current match and may refer to those notes while this match is in progress. Players are expected to take their notes in a timely fashion. Players who take too much time will be subject to the appropriate provisions of the DCI Penalty Guidelines.

During the draft portion of a tournament, players and spectators may not take any notes. Players may not refer to outside notes during the match. This includes notes from previous matches of that day.

Cards used in a tournament may not have writing on their faces other than signatures or artistic modifications. Modifications may not obscure the artwork so as to make the card unrecognizable. If modifications to a card are deemed by the Head Judge to constitute outside notes or unsporting conduct, the player using such cards will be subject to the appropriate provisions of the DCI Penalty Guidelines.

Versus
11-07-2007, 07:57 AM
So, if you could accomplish it quickly enough without stalling the game you could actually scribble down your opponents entire deck after say Extirpating, seeing it get Dredged/Milled into the yard, whatever?

emidln
11-07-2007, 08:19 AM
So, if you could accomplish it quickly enough without stalling the game you could actually scribble down your opponents entire deck after say Extirpating, seeing it get Dredged/Milled into the yard, whatever?

I've done this after capping someone. The SCG judge didn't seem to have a problem with it.

Lego
11-07-2007, 12:43 PM
Notes are not public information. You do not have to show your opponent notes that you take during the match.

This is currently only in policy, but it's supposedly going to make it into the Universal Tournament Rules at some point.

I've had two judges rule incorrectly then. Since this is not in the rules, what do you do when a judge rules that the notes you take must be public?

Jaynel
11-07-2007, 04:16 PM
I've had two judges rule incorrectly then. Since this is not in the rules, what do you do when a judge rules that the notes you take must be public?

Eat them very quickly.

cdr
11-07-2007, 06:32 PM
I've had two judges rule incorrectly then. Since this is not in the rules, what do you do when a judge rules that the notes you take must be public?

In a tournament, appeal the ruling. If the head judge rules that they're public, you're out of luck - the head judge's word goes, even if he's wrong in this instance.

After the match nicely approach him and ask him to ask a higher-level judge or look it up on the judge mailing list.

If notes being private is important to you for some reason, it wouldn't hurt to approach the head judge before the tournament begins.

Tacosnape
11-07-2007, 09:41 PM
Eat them very quickly.

The notes or the judges?

Jaynel
11-07-2007, 09:56 PM
Judges tend to be a bit stringy. I'd go with the notes.

Lego
11-08-2007, 03:50 AM
If notes being private is important to you for some reason, it wouldn't hurt to approach the head judge before the tournament begins.

They're not. I don't even remember why this was relevant. Probably SDT.

Versus
11-20-2007, 11:22 AM
All of that is really good to know. I could see myself bringing paper to keep score that had outside writing on it not even knowing that was illegal. Even bringing the same sheet of paper from a previous round.

edit: I posted a another stack question here, but it was just a bunch of fucking incoherent ramblings. I'll figure it out.