Flusterstorm - Missed trigger?

[strom]

Scenario:
Player A casts an instant and passes priority. He has one untapped land.
Player B casts Flusterstorm targeting the instant.
Player A asks player B if he passes priority. The answer is yes.
REL is competetive.

My question:
Did Player B miss the storm trigger with the effect that Player A can use his last mana to pay for Flusterstorm?
At least Player B didn't announce the storm trigger and therefore he didn't choose a target with copy.
On the other hand I have found this:

Triggered abilities that do nothing except create one or more copies of a spell or ability (such as storm or cipher) automatically resolve, but awareness of the resulting objects must be demonstrated using the same requirements as described above (even though the objects may not be triggered abilities).

For example, the Storm ability of Empty the Warrens is not considered missed even if the spell’s controller does not specifically announce the trigger before passing priority after casting the spell. However, if that player then forgets to put the additional Goblins onto the battlefield before moving on with his or her turn, the Storm trigger would be considered missed after all. Again, this is a concession to the way players actually play magic.

[Julian23]

No, he didn't miss the Storm trigger.

Unless he literally forgets his card has Storm (as in: allows you to just pay 1, then puts Flusterstorm into the yard and moves on with the game), triggers that don't have a visual effect on the game state don't require being announced.

For example, you also don't need to announe your Counterbalance, Craterhoof Behemoth or Tendrils of Agony triggers.

[decan]

Im wondering what all are visual effects. Im guessing tokens, destroying/sacrificing a creature, drawing a card. What else?

[Julian23]

"Do you need to move your arms to resolve the trigger?" - Yes/Visual, No/Non-Visual

We would need cdr for the official version though

[ScatmanX]

For example, you also don't need to announe your Counterbalance, Craterhoof Behemoth or Tendrils of Agony triggers.

Don't we?
I mean, if someone casts a spell with cb on the battlefield, and I simply use top in response, I've seen scenarios where we'll lose the cb trigger because we didn't announced it before using Top. Did that changed?

[Julian23]

Don't we?
I mean, if someone casts a spell with cb on the battlefield, and I simply use top in response, I've seen scenarios where we'll lose the cb trigger because we didn't announced it before using Top. Did that changed?

Yes, that changed at least 1, probably close to 2 years ago.

[sdematt]

Not quite 2 years ago, I think it's at least been over a year. During GP Denver, I think that rule was still in effect, and it was a terrible time.

-Matt

[Julian23]

Yeah, as I said "close to 2 years" ago. I remember during the GP Trials for GP Strasbourg 2013 (~April), the rule was already in effect.

[cdr]

Scenario:
Player A casts an instant and passes priority. He has one untapped land.
Player B casts Flusterstorm targeting the instant.
Player A asks player B if he passes priority. The answer is yes.
REL is competetive.

My question:
Did Player B miss the storm trigger with the effect that Player A can use his last mana to pay for Flusterstorm?
At least Player B didn't announce the storm trigger and therefore he didn't choose a target with copy.

No. The point at which B must demonstrate awareness of the storm trigger is the point at which the copies resolve and A must pay (or not). B does not have to announce targets for the copies, since they have the original target by default.

You have until a trigger requires a decision or affects the visible game state to acknowledge it. I think visible state is defined in the tournament rules, but it's physically represented things in zones (cards, copies, tokens, counters, etc), the state of objects (tapped, flipped, etc), plus life totals.

The most recent substantive change to the trigger rules was a little over two years ago, to settle that debate.

[firebadmattgood]

No, he didn't miss the Storm trigger.

Unless he literally forgets his card has Storm (as in: allows you to just pay 1, then puts Flusterstorm into the yard and moves on with the game), triggers that don't have a visual effect on the game state don't require being announced.

For example, you also don't need to announe your Counterbalance, Craterhoof Behemoth or Tendrils of Agony triggers.

Related question. If I cast shardless agent into counterbalance, and ask if cascade resolves, if my opponent answers "yes", then he missed his counterbalance trigger for the agent, correct?

Upon casting agent, the stack goes:

counterbalance
cascade
agent

So the only way for cascade to resolve would be for him to miss his trigger.

[Julian23]

That is correct because of the way triggers are put onto the stack in ActivePlayer-NonActivePlayer order. When I had Dark Confidant in Vintage and my opponent had Tangle Wire, I would also ask "reveal for Confidant?"; they say "yes" and had just missed their Tangle Wire trigger.

[iamajellydonut]

Unless he literally forgets his card has Storm (as in: allows you to just pay 1, then puts Flusterstorm into the yard and moves on with the game), triggers that don't have a visual effect on the game state don't require being announced.

You don't need to announce any triggers. You simply have to make sure they're acknowledged before you reach the point of no return. This is true for both visible and non-visible triggers.

Also, the only one of those triggers that could be deemed non-visible is the Craterhoof Behemoth's. What is and is not considered "non-visible" is defined by what happens when the spell resolves. Do you have to do anything. Do you have to do anything when Craterhoof Behemoth enters the battlefield? No. When Craterhoof Behemoth enters the battlefield, creatures you control would be assumed to have recieved +X/+X and trample. You don't have to acknowledge this or state this in any way until it's relevant. Usually that means assigning combat damage. However, if you attack with your creatures for a total of 24 damage and both you and your opponent write down "8" on your life pads, the trigger is then considered missed.

In sharp contrast, ignoring that their triggers are completely time-sensitive and therefore it's sort of irrelevant whether they are or are not visible, neither Counterbalance nor Tendrils of Agony are considered to be non-visible as they both have very visible effects when they resolve. Targeting, changes in life totals, revealing hidden information, and putting an opponent's card into a graveyard all count.

[iamajellydonut]

In other news, a question based off the OP's scenario.

Player A (Casting random instant with one mana source available)
Player B (Casting Flusterstorm)

Everything is hunky-dory with the stack and effects begin to resolve. Player A pays 1 mana for the Flusterstorm he sees, and Player B correctly points out that the spell is still countered unless Player A pays one more (there's a variety of wording Player B could use to state this).

What happens to Player A's one mana source?

[Esper3k]

In other news, a question based off the OP's scenario.

Player A (Casting random instant with one mana source available)
Player B (Casting Flusterstorm)

Everything is hunky-dory with the stack and effects begin to resolve. Player A pays 1 mana for the Flusterstorm he sees, and Player B correctly points out that the spell is still countered unless Player A pays one more (there's a variety of wording Player B could use to state this).

What happens to Player A's one mana source?

It's gone? He used it to pay for a Flusterstorm - a completely legal action to take.

[Julian23]

But he used it to pay for the effect of the card Flusterstorm, not one of his copies. You can't pay for that until the copies created by the Storm trigger have resolved.

So what would you do here? I asked a judge-friend of mine and he said he wouldn't be able to make a ruling with the information provided in this thread.

[Esper3k]

Yeah, I guess if he just tapped it and said "Pay it", you could assume he paid for a copy? You should probably just ask confirm that it's for the copy for the original to be clear. If he was trying to pay for the original before the copy, he might pick up a warning for trying to take an illegal game action?

[iamajellydonut]

The way I see it, it would depend on how each player phrased what they did, if they did...


If Player A silently tapped for a mana with no express intentions or tapped for a mana and said something along the lines of "pay one", it would be considered going towards the copy provided Player B remembered to mention as much.

If Player A paid one mana, and Player B put Flusterstorm in the graveyard either before or while stating that Player A needs to pay one more, I would consider the trigger missed.

If Player A tapped for a mana and said "pay for the Flusterstorm" or something along those lines, it would result in the crap that Julian mentioned, and I think the ultimate resolution of such a scenario after a bit of Q&A would simply be that Player A would untap their land and make decisions from there.

Thoughts?

[cdr]

The way I see it, it would depend on how each player phrased what they did, if they did...


If Player A silently tapped for a mana with no express intentions or tapped for a mana and said something along the lines of "pay one", it would be considered going towards the copy provided Player B remembered to mention as much.

If Player A paid one mana, and Player B put Flusterstorm in the graveyard either before or while stating that Player A needs to pay one more, I would consider the trigger missed.

If Player A tapped for a mana and said "pay for the Flusterstorm" or something along those lines, it would result in the crap that Julian mentioned, and I think the ultimate resolution of such a scenario after a bit of Q&A would simply be that Player A would untap their land and make decisions from there.

Thoughts?

The fact that A is expressing confusion is a pretty clear indication they're attempting to do something illegal. In most cases I think a judge would believe A, give the warning for GRV, and have them untap the land.

[iamajellydonut]

The fact that A is expressing confusion is a pretty clear indication they're attempting to do something illegal. In most cases I think a judge would believe A, give the warning for GRV, and have them untap the land.

How is it more or less of an illegal intention than what Jullian suggested with the Dank Confidant trick? (which I used to dodge The Abyss at GPNJ thanks to you, Julian.)

Edit: Not being snide. Just looking to know more.

[cdr]

How is it more or less of an illegal intention than what Jullian suggested with the Dank Confidant trick? (which I used to dodge The Abyss at GPNJ thanks to you, Julian.)

Edit: Not being snide. Just looking to know more.

Not sure what "the Dark Confidant trick" is.

In the Flutterstorm case it's not "an illegal intention", it's attempting to do something illegal - pay for an effect before the spell is resolving. If they were not attempting to do something illegal, they would not be surprised that the storm copies existed.

If you mean they could be paying 1, seeing if the opponent forgot the storm trigger, and then trying to undo that if the opponent did remember - well, saying they forgot the storm is Cheating. It's up to judges to suss out cheating.