cabal therapy question

[SpeedOfDark]

I want to get a few rules clarifications on Cabal Therapy. Please answer the following statements with True or False, and feel free to add explanations if you want.

1. You name a card on resolution.

2. If you flashback and sacrifice a creature with an exit effect, the exit effect will happen before therapy.

3. Suppose I have therapy is in the yard. If I cast a veteran explorer, I can hold priority and flashback cabal therapy before my opponent has a chance to Swords my creature.

4. Similarly to #3, if my opponent has a deathrite shaman in play, I can cast cabal therapy from my hand, hold priority, and flash it back from the graveyard before my opponent has a chance to clear it from my graveyard.

[davelin]

I want to get a few rules clarifications on Cabal Therapy. Please answer the following statements with True or False, and feel free to add explanations if you want.

1. You name a card on resolution.

2. If you flashback and sacrifice a creature with an exit effect, the exit effect will happen before therapy.

3. Suppose I have 2 open mana and a cabal therapy is in the yard. If I cast a veteran explorer, I can hold priority and flashback cabal therapy before my opponent has a chance to Swords my creature.

4. Similarly to #3, if my opponent has a deathrite shaman in play, I can cast cabal therapy from my hand, hold priority, and flash it back from the graveyard before my opponent has a chance to clear it from my graveyard.

1) True

2) Unsure

3) True

4) Also believe this is true

[PirateKing]

After you resolve your Cabal Therapy, you have priority, and you opponent can't do anything until you pass it back, for example after casting a second spell. If that second spell is a flashbacked Cabal Therapy, part of casting it is removing it from the graveyard, so at the point when your opponent could respond, it's not in the graveyard to interact with. So for 3 & 4, know that your opponent can only react to actions you take, and that at the end of each event, priority return to you.

[jbone2016]

I want to get a few rules clarifications on Cabal Therapy. Please answer the following statements with True or False, and feel free to add explanations if you want.

1. You name a card on resolution.

2. If you flashback and sacrifice a creature with an exit effect, the exit effect will happen before therapy.

3. Suppose I have therapy is in the yard. If I cast a veteran explorer, I can hold priority and flashback cabal therapy before my opponent has a chance to Swords my creature.

4. Similarly to #3, if my opponent has a deathrite shaman in play, I can cast cabal therapy from my hand, hold priority, and flash it back from the graveyard before my opponent has a chance to clear it from my graveyard.

As a Nic Fit player.
1. Yes.
2. Yes. Not so helpful vs burn.
3. Yes.
4. Yes. As long no other triggers happen between castings.

[Technics]

I want to get a few rules clarifications on Cabal Therapy. Please answer the following statements with True or False, and feel free to add explanations if you want.

1. You name a card on resolution.

2. If you flashback and sacrifice a creature with an exit effect, the exit effect will happen before therapy.

3. Suppose I have therapy is in the yard. If I cast a veteran explorer, I can hold priority and flashback cabal therapy before my opponent has a chance to Swords my creature.

4. Similarly to #3, if my opponent has a deathrite shaman in play, I can cast cabal therapy from my hand, hold priority, and flash it back from the graveyard before my opponent has a chance to clear it from my graveyard.

1. True

2. Correct:
1 - Cabal Therapy is announced. Cabal Therapy moves to the stack.
2 - Modes are announced. Then target for Cabal Therapy is chosen.
3 - Costs are calculated and paid. Creature is sac'd and moves to the graveyard. Creature's ability triggers, but doesn't go on the stack yet.
4 - Cabal therapy is considered cast. The next time a player would get priority, that creatures ability goes on the stack on top of Cabal Therapy.

3. Correct

4. Correct

[cdr]

Strictly by the comp rules, anything not specified in "steps for casting a spell" (targeting, modes, division of effects, paying costs, etc) is chosen on resolution. Per the shortcut rules, however, you can announce choices that happen on resolution while you're casting the spell. If you choose to do that, you are bound by those choices unless your opponent responds to the spell.

If you sacrifice a creature with a leaves the battlefield/graveyard from the battlefield trigger as part of a cost, the trigger will trigger but wait to be put on the stack until someone gets priority. The spell will go on the stack once it's completely cast, and then the trigger will be put on the stack above it.

You don't need to hold priority, since you only automatically pass priority when you add something to the stack.

Again, no need to hold priority.

[SpeedOfDark]

Great, thanks for all the good comments guys!

I am playing a Nic Fit style deck in a tournament in February, and I figure I was best to be 100% on cabal therapy interactions beforehand so that I don't give advantages to opponents needlessly.

[PirateKing]

An aside: retention of priority only relevant if you are looking to enter an effect in the space between you casting a spell and that spell resolving. The most common example of this is Infernal Tutor and Lion's Eye Diamond. After casting Infernal Tutor, if you pass priority to your opponent, and they pass it back to you, Infernal Tutor resolves, and it's too late to empty your hand through Lion's Eye Diamond. The point isn't to deny your opponent time to answer the spell, they will have just as much an opportunity to counter it, the point is to guarantee Hellbent if your opponent has no responses to Infernal Tutor.

So be careful when saying things like "retain priority", or you'll end up like players who use "in response" to preface everything they do, even when it would make no sense in that situation. "In response to you playing Grizzly Bear, I Shock it."

[SpeedOfDark]

An aside: retention of priority only relevant if you are looking to enter an effect in the space between you casting a spell and that spell resolving. The most common example of this is Infernal Tutor and Lion's Eye Diamond. After casting Infernal Tutor, if you pass priority to your opponent, and they pass it back to you, Infernal Tutor resolves, and it's too late to empty your hand through Lion's Eye Diamond. The point isn't to deny your opponent time to answer the spell, they will have just as much an opportunity to counter it, the point is to guarantee Hellbent if your opponent has no responses to Infernal Tutor.

So be careful when saying things like "retain priority", or you'll end up like players who use "in response" to preface everything they do, even when it would make no sense in that situation. "In response to you playing Grizzly Bear, I Shock it."

Yeah, I think I get it now. I definitely don't want to sound like those grizzly bear shockers :P

[nedleeds]

cdr makes a very salient point about shortcuts. Many new players will go all in one blurted out noise, "Cabal therapy you name swords to plowshares!". This is the shortcut he is describing ... if you are playing countermagic, or actually have or don't have an STP as the target you are at an advantage. As the cabal therapy player you shouldn't tip your hand like that, just annouce it and pay the cost and specify that you are targeting your opponent.

E.g. if I don't have STP and can nug your graveyard for the run back I wouldn't bother countering it, you are going to be held to your card choice.

[TsumiBand]

I don't want to drag this down into a discussion about strategy or "mind tricks" or whatever, but on this previous thread here @ The Source regarding Cabal Therapy and shortcuts, the following excerpt of the Comp Rules was posted.

716.2. Taking a shortcut follows the following procedure.

716.2a At any point in the game, the player with priority may suggest a shortcut by describing a
sequence of game choices, for all players, that may be legally taken based on the current game
state and the predictable results of the sequence of choices. This sequence may be a nonrepetitive
series of choices, a loop that repeats a specified number of times, multiple loops, or
nested loops, and may even cross multiple turns. It can’t include conditional actions, where the
outcome of a game event determines the next action a player takes. The ending point of this
sequence must be a place where a player has priority, though it need not be the player proposing
the shortcut.

716.2b Each other player, in turn order starting after the player who suggested the shortcut, may
either accept the proposed sequence, or shorten it by naming a place where he or she will make
a game choice that’s different than what’s been proposed. (The player doesn’t need to specify at
this time what the new choice will be.) This place becomes the new ending point of the
proposed sequence.

716.2c Once the last player has either accepted or shortened the shortcut proposal, the shortcut is
taken. The game advances to the last proposed ending point, with all game choices contained in
the shortcut proposal having been taken. If the shortcut was shortened from the original
proposal, the player who now has priority must make a different game choice than what was
originally proposed for that player.

I want to understand 716.2c a little better, because as I read it right now, the responding player can force the original caster to name a completely different card if they have any effects that can shorten the shortcut.

A theoretical sequence of events:

Player A) "Therapy you, naming Show and Tell." //shortcut proposed
Player B) "In response, Brainstorm?" //shortcut shortened and re-proposed
A) "Go ahead." //did not have the option to re-shorten the shortcut; also had no effects to announce

Player B resolves Brainstorm and has no further effects.

If I am reading the rules correctly, Player A is forced to name a card besides Show and Tell at this point, correct? Per the following bolded parts of the ruling:

Once the last player has either accepted or shortened the shortcut proposal, the shortcut is
taken. The game advances to the last proposed ending point, with all game choices contained in
the shortcut proposal having been taken. If the shortcut was shortened from the original
proposal, the player who now has priority must make a different game choice than what was
originally proposed for that player.

Player B's response shortens the shortcut -- instead of the endpoint being Player B revealing their hand to Cabal Therapy's effect, they opted to instead resolve Brainstorm. Is Player A forced to name a non-Show and Tell card? This introduces a really strange dynamic to Cabal Therapy, if that is the case.

Oddly, in the actual Comprehensive Rules as they stand today, the entries above and below this one have examples to backup their intention -- but this one doesn't.

[PirateKing]

TsumiBand, I read 716.2c as:

Player A) "Cabal Therapy, targeting you, you have no response, Cabal Therapy resolves, naming Show and Tell." //shortcut proposed
Player B) "In response, Brainstorm" //shortcut shortened to include different game choice then what was proposed in the shortcut, in this case having no responses.

Player B can't shorten the shortcut and then not have any responses, because then the shortcut isn't shortened. If you want to shorten the shortcut, you must have some reason to do so, by making a different game action then what was proposed by the shortcut. Also I'm done typing short for 2014, thanks.

[Tempus]

Actually, no!

Shortcut proposed by Player A: Cabal Therapy targeting you, iff it resolves right away (without a response) I will name "Show and Tell" as the card.

The moment Player B casts Brainstorm the shortcut becomes invalid. Therefore Player A can, as soon as and if Cabal Therapy resolves name any nonland card he wants to.

An example for a shortcut that can be shortened:

Say Player A has an Underground Sea and an Eternal Witness in play and X cards in the graveyard, among them Oona, Queen of the Fae and Worldgorger Dragon. He then casts Animate Dead targeting Worldgorger Dragon.
Proposed shortcut by Player A: I add one by one 1 black mana to my mana pool and return one card from my graveyard to my hand (without untapping and exiling everything as, with the Dragon going from graveyard to battlefield) until there are no cards in the graveyard except for Oona, I will then target Oona, when the Animate Dead comes back from Exile.
Proposed shortened shortcut by Player B: Take all cards in the graveyard into your hand, put Oona on the battlefield enchanted with Animate Dead, you have X-2 black mana in your mana pool.

Now Player A has a choice of a) accepting the shortcut or b) actually perform every action that the game requires him to do or c) propose a different shortcut.

[FTW]

A theoretical sequence of events:

Player A) "Therapy you, naming Show and Tell." //shortcut proposed
Player B) "In response, Brainstorm?" //shortcut shortened and re-proposed
A) "Go ahead." //did not have the option to re-shorten the shortcut; also had no effects to announce

Player B resolves Brainstorm and has no further effects.

If I am reading the rules correctly, Player A is forced to name a card besides Show and Tell at this point, correct? Per the following bolded parts of the ruling:

Player B's response shortens the shortcut -- instead of the endpoint being Player B revealing their hand to Cabal Therapy's effect, they opted to instead resolve Brainstorm. Is Player A forced to name a non-Show and Tell card? This introduces a really strange dynamic to Cabal Therapy, if that is the case.

Oddly, in the actual Comprehensive Rules as they stand today, the entries above and below this one have examples to backup their intention -- but this one doesn't.

If my understanding of legalese is correct, I believe in part c, "the player who now has priority [and] must make a different game choice" is referring to Player B, not Player A. I think your confusion is in thinking it applies to Player A. But after the shortened shortcut is applies, player A no longer has priority.

Player A's proposed shortcut: I cast Cabal Therapy, I pass priority, you pass priority, I name Show and Tell as it resolves
Player B's amendment: Wait, I don't pass priority. I cast Brainstorm.

Player B rejected the shortcut and took priority. The new shortcut is "Player A casts Cabal Therapy and passes priority". At this point, player B is the one who must do something other than the proposed passing priority (otherwise he has no reason to shorten the shortcut). In this case, it is casting Brainstorm. Since the shortcut was shortened, Player A is not obliged to either name Show and Tell or not name Show and Tell. He could even Spell Pierce Brainstorm first.

Basically, the rules do support what you think should happen.