Say I have a Phyrexian Revoker or a Pithing Needle out. I name something that, it doesnt actually affect in any meaningful way. For example, I revoker naming Bridge from Below. If my opponent sacrifices a dude with a bridge in the yard to a therapy or whatever, but doesn't make a zombie, am I cheating by not telling him that Revoker does nothing and he is missing his trigger? Or is this simply unsporting? Or is it "next-leveling"?
If you don't actually say that your Needle/Revoker is prohibiting his unaffacted cards to trigger/work, there is nothing wrong with it, as long as you don't violate the rules (GRV) or tell him lies about information you are obliged to tell the truth about. If he just assumes his cards are shut down, it's his fault.
There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle".
- Albert Einstein
If it's a "May" you can continue as though they've opted to select not to use the trigger. If they call a judge, you can say that (s)he missed the trigger. I do agree that this is kind of a prick thing to do at more casual tournaments.
If it's a "Must", I'd advise you say something because it's cheating if you don't and know. If you missed it (accidentally), call when you notice and expect the judges to be more upset that they have to write something on your slip than actually being called to it.
Tinkering with some crafting theory. Here
Rules knowledge is a skill advantage in Magic. You can certainly mislead with rules-legal actions, but you can't otherwise lie or mislead. If they ask you whether something works, you have to answer correctly or call a judge to answer.
It's possible. But it involves... {checks archives} Nature's Revolt, Opalescence, two Unstable Shapeshifters (one of which started as a Doppelganger), a Tide, an animated land, a creature with Fading, a Silver Wyvern, some way to get a creature into play in response to stuff, some way to get a land into play in response to stuff (a different land from the animated land), and one heck of a Rube Goldberg timing diagram.
-David DeLaney
A friend of mine once named Peacekeeper with Phyrexian Revoker when he had no maindeck removal for it in his Affinity deck. A truely masterful play in my eyes.
The seven cardinal sins of Legacy:
1. Discuss the unbanning ofLand TaxEarthcraft.
2. Argue that banning Force of Will would make the format healthier.
3. Play Brainstorm without Fetchlands.
4. Stifle Standstill.
5. Think that Gaea's Blessing will make you Solidarity-proof.
6. Pass priority after playing Infernal Tutor.
7. Fail to playtest against Nourishing Lich (coZ iT wIlL gEt U!).
Tinkering with some crafting theory. Here
You can follow me on Twitter at: www.twitter.com/MartinFSNielsen
He did this play several times and most often his opponent's were confused and called a judge for help from what I know.
But what it's about is trying to squeeze out every legal edge you can get. I'm sure somebody somewhere would actually fall for it.
I for example always ask "Who HAS TO start?" when my opponent wins the die roll. It's mostly just a source of amusement but this one time, my opponent allowed me start game3 of the Merfolk Mirror. Out of all matchups...yeah :-)
The seven cardinal sins of Legacy:
1. Discuss the unbanning ofLand TaxEarthcraft.
2. Argue that banning Force of Will would make the format healthier.
3. Play Brainstorm without Fetchlands.
4. Stifle Standstill.
5. Think that Gaea's Blessing will make you Solidarity-proof.
6. Pass priority after playing Infernal Tutor.
7. Fail to playtest against Nourishing Lich (coZ iT wIlL gEt U!).
You can follow me on Twitter at: www.twitter.com/MartinFSNielsen
You and your brother meet a an old women. She shows you a green pill and promises one of you great power and lots of wealth, while the other will lose all his hair. She tells you that she will be back tomorrow.
You and your brother roll a die; you win.
The next morning, the old lady comes back and asks: "Who has to eat the green pill?" .
Notice how you would feel completly different about the exact same question if it was phrased "Who gets to eat the green pill?"
The seven cardinal sins of Legacy:
1. Discuss the unbanning ofLand TaxEarthcraft.
2. Argue that banning Force of Will would make the format healthier.
3. Play Brainstorm without Fetchlands.
4. Stifle Standstill.
5. Think that Gaea's Blessing will make you Solidarity-proof.
6. Pass priority after playing Infernal Tutor.
7. Fail to playtest against Nourishing Lich (coZ iT wIlL gEt U!).
Haha. So okay, you're playing a guy and you win game 2 and while shuffling for game 3 you ask your opponent (with an ominous tone of voice) "who has to start?" And your opponent panics and says "you" before dropping his deck due to shaky hands. Awesome
You can follow me on Twitter at: www.twitter.com/MartinFSNielsen
You can, but it's a good idea to tell opponent to call a judge if they want to make sure. You don't want even the preception of attempting to take advantage of illegal play, if your opponent goes through with something illegal.
It's usually best to ask a judge anyway unless you're absolutely sure.
It's possible. But it involves... {checks archives} Nature's Revolt, Opalescence, two Unstable Shapeshifters (one of which started as a Doppelganger), a Tide, an animated land, a creature with Fading, a Silver Wyvern, some way to get a creature into play in response to stuff, some way to get a land into play in response to stuff (a different land from the animated land), and one heck of a Rube Goldberg timing diagram.
-David DeLaney
That one Beta-Duals, all-Japanese Foil guy I ran into at the Bazaar of Moxen Vintage event was "absolutely sure" he could cycle his Rebuild from the graveyard after casting Yagwmoth's Will when it was his only out after fizzling hard on cantrips. Since I don't play a lot of Vintage, I told him that I wasn't too sure about that and we should probably call a judge.
"No, no judge! I am a Vintage expert!!" Ok, definitely calling a judge now, lol.
The seven cardinal sins of Legacy:
1. Discuss the unbanning ofLand TaxEarthcraft.
2. Argue that banning Force of Will would make the format healthier.
3. Play Brainstorm without Fetchlands.
4. Stifle Standstill.
5. Think that Gaea's Blessing will make you Solidarity-proof.
6. Pass priority after playing Infernal Tutor.
7. Fail to playtest against Nourishing Lich (coZ iT wIlL gEt U!).
Well, in fact asking a judge is also not determinating. In a competitive tournament of above 100 players my oponent played Lake of the dead and -"in response to the trigger effect, he wanted to sac his only swamp to add to pool"-. I said he could not do this, we called a judge and he approved the play. So........
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)