There's a blurb in the DCI rules about taking game actions which cause your opponent to miss triggered abilities being A Bad Thing. It seems aimed at fast play, but plays that are in line with the aforementioned may be subject to scrutiny.
And it isn't an out! Because the minute you have an opponent that doesn't confuse her left hand for her right, or a trigger for an activation, the gig is up. It's one thing if there are no legit Revoker targets, it's another to legitimize the line of play.
What you, TsumiBand, are missing is that we are talking about scenarios where your opponent making a mistake is your only out. If you are not even trying to take advantage of these situations because you are giving full credit to your opponent to make the right play, you are costing yourself EV in the long run.
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!).
Maybe I wasn't clear when I said "sooner or later that trick isn't going to work" but I guess I thought it was understood. You're hoping the opponent whiffs, so you misplay a card in the hopes that they also misplay. Of course it's not illegal to do so, but you're still tossing the card's potential out the window and hoping that your opponent is not hip to the difference between activated and triggered abilities.
Like I said, it is one thing if you legitimately have no actual cards to name, it's no different than having Path to Exile in your deck against something utterly creatureless. I get that. It's another thing to play a useless permanent and hope the opponent is an asparagus.
Misplaying and hoping the opponent doesn't notice has an upside and a downside. I've been in situations where my opponent got much further than they should have because they counted on this being A Thing. Specific example - someone had made it to the last round of the Ravnica prerelease with a Boros/g deck by convincing his opponents that Frenzied Goblin could just target all their dudes instead of simply triggering the one time. I knew better, and when I called him out on it -- and now, this I can't verify, but it was one of those "you're a real dick and I can see it in your braces" moments -- the look on my opponent's face and the tone of their voice when they said, "Oh I didn't realize". Bull shit -- he knew better, and I knew he knew, and he knew I knew what he'd done, and we also both knew very well that it wasn't as if there was anything that could be done about it. I did not win that match, but it doesn't matter.
So, clearly the Needle/Revoker situations are not in the same vein as this, because it is legal to name whatever card you want as long as it meets the restrictions on the card in question. I guess I don't see the reasoning in doing this because it operates on the idea that you're underestimating your opponent. You're hoping they don't get it. That means you have decided your opponent is worse than they actually are. Stealing the occasional game doesn't make it a sound line of play. I don't think this is that strange.
Well, as we all hopefully know, dredge is not a deck that many decks can interact with in game one. So a lot of the time "misplaying" a revoker to name a card that out doesn't actually shut off may be your ONLY play that can even possibly get you a win. Sure your opponent could not be an idiot and just kill you, but it was going to happen either way. By not playing the revoker, you have reduced your slim chance of winning to literal 0. So why not try? By your reasoning, if my opponent has enough lethal on the board to kill me, I shouldn't even try to bluff that I have something because a good player would just beat me anyway. If I've learned anything, it's that players are sometimes worse than what I assume they are.
There's a huge difference between bluffing an answer and playing Revoker on something it can't touch. Going further there's a big difference between unknown information (the bluff) and known information (Revoker on Bridge is just RTFC, the cards speak for themselves).
TLDR: While we can all agree that needle or revoker naming bridge from below doesn't work, and we can all agree that it is a generally low-EV play to make in a competitive environment where people generally know what their cards DO, there is conflict over whether doing so to bluff your opponent into missing their own triggers is considered a line of play, or just dumbassery. Personally, my opinion is that it doesn't matter what you name with revoker, you're just going to throw him in front of the first attacking token or ichorid to block the damage and exile those damn bridges ASAP anyway.
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!).
Lake of the Dead doesn't have a triggered ability, it has an replacement effect. It won't enter the battlefield if you don't sacrifice a Swamp before it enters.
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!).
I find it to be not reliable. sometimes you find the card you want sometimes not... I think there is something wrojng with languages in that program.
However it's blocked at work... (As magic card info which is the second source i know that has the card's rule text as it is written in gatherer).
Sometimes Gatherer just bails on things that it shouldn't; I keep seeing cards in the wrong colors when I say "exclude non-selected" and it doesn't deal well with its own escape characters or boolean operators.
Like, say I had some thematically pleasing deck I wanted to build that is centered around Elephants and Devils (I don't know why; it's just two random creature types). A simple search with Gatherer would ideally just look like "elephant OR devil" with a check in "Types", right -- but just to make it work, you have to type "OR elephant OR devil". Which is not difficult or beyond a reasonable workaround, but it is unintuitive and lame. Forget about && and ||, you will crash the page right quick. Are your inputs not fully sanitized, Gatherer? O_o
I don't know why people even use Gatherer. magiccards.info is easier to use, more reliable and more stable than anything produced by Wizards. It's also loading super quickly.
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!).
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)