Retaining Priority

[Wallace]

The thread I wanted to post this in seems to be gone, so I will post it here. I just want to make sure I am right, read:

Wallace taps Urza's Tower
Wallace taps Urza's Power Plant
Wallace taps Island
Wallace plays Mindslaver from Hand
<Careta> play it
Careta taps Boseiju, Who Shelters All
Wallace plays Mindslaver from Hand
Careta plays Krosan Grip from Hand
<Wallace> k, well I will activate it without passing
<Careta> have split
<Wallace> I know, I can activate the ability after I play the spell
<Wallace> before I pass
<Wallace> I have 1st priority after spell resolves
<Careta> minds dead
<Wallace> no it's not
<Careta> i think
<Careta> why ?
<Wallace> I have 1st priority
<Wallace> I cast it, then after it resolves I activate it before I pass priority
<Careta> no
<Wallace> I know how this works, happens all the time
Careta sacrifices Krosan Grip
<Careta> blah
<Wallace> after a spell resolves you retain priority, no?
<Careta> no
<Wallace> ...
<Player Lost>

So I get 1st priority, after Mindslaver resolves right, he won't have a chance to grip it?

[TrialByFire]

Correct

[DeathScythe]

Whenever a spells/ability is played, the player who played the spell/ability gains priority
Whenever a spell/ability resolved priority is given to the active player

so yes, mindslaving him, without giving him the chance to grip, is possible. However, it's possible to 'cheat' with this so I would recommend saying that you want to break it right away before giving your opponent a chance to play the grip. If you don't announce you want to retain priority the situation could get ugly...

[Wallace]

Whenever a spells/ability is played, the player who played the spell/ability gains priority
Whenever a spell/ability resolved priority is given to the active player

so yes, mindslaving him, without giving him the chance to grip, is possible. However, it's possible to 'cheat' with this so I would recommend saying that you want to break it right away before giving your opponent a chance to play the grip. If you don't announce you want to retain priority the situation could get ugly...

Yeah he didn't even give me a chance to do anything, hell I I was still waiting for him to tell me it resolved when he gripped it...

[Shriekmaw]

Yeah he didn't even give me a chance to do anything, hell I I was still waiting for him to tell me it resolved when he gripped it...


I would tell that guy to learn the rules of the game. Thats why I hate workstation. Soon, we will have legacy for magic online. :)

[deviant]

These kind of situations are the reason why I'm one of the annoying fucks who ask Ok? for every fucking cantrip.

[Ramptoniin]

Just a question, cant he Krosan in response to you activating the Mindslaver in which you're screwed for using it?

I havent been playing again seriously since all this Priority stuff came into effect so I'm still new to it. Bear with me :)

[Jak]

Just a question, cant he Krosan in response to you activating the Mindslaver in which you're screwed for using it?

I havent been playing again seriously since all this Priority stuff came into effect so I'm still new to it. Bear with me :)

No. The activation is already on the stack and will resolve, unless you stifle it. Gripping it in response to the activation is a bad idea.

[Wallace]

Just a question, cant he Krosan in response to you activating the Mindslaver in which you're screwed for using it?

I havent been playing again seriously since all this Priority stuff came into effect so I'm still new to it. Bear with me :)

No because I have to sacrifice Slaver as part of the activation. There would be no reason to so though, the trigger would still go on the stack and resolve after you Grip.

Example:

Grindstone reads:

:3: T; Target player puts the top 2 cards of there library into there graveyard...yada, yada,yada...

So if you Grip the Stone in resp. to the activation, stone would be destroyed, then you would mill your top 2.

[Ramptoniin]

Ah interesting, But if you Milled on their turn, they can Grip in response and it will destroy before? Just trying to straighten out this priority business haha

[Elficidium]

Ah interesting, But if you Milled on their turn, they can Grip in response and it will destroy before? Just trying to straighten out this priority business haha
Destroying the source of an ability does not stop that ability from resolving. This is a change from pre-6th, if I'm not mistaken.

[KrzyMoose]

Destroying the source of an ability does not stop that ability from resolving. This is a change from pre-6th, if I'm not mistaken.

Yeh, they fixed this with the 6th Edition Rules.


so yes, mindslaving him, without giving him the chance to grip, is possible. However, it's possible to 'cheat' with this so I would recommend saying that you want to break it right away before giving your opponent a chance to play the grip. If you don't announce you want to retain priority the situation could get ugly...

Not really. During your main phase, you have priority. If you cast Mindslaver, and your opponent says "It resolves", you get priority back. You can sit there all day long (not literally, of course) and he cannot cast a spell.

However, if you, say, wish to enter your attack phase, you pass priority at the end of your main phase.

[DeathScythe]

Not really. During your main phase, you have priority. If cast Mindslaver, and your opponent says "It resolves", you get priority back. You can sit there all day long (not literally, of course) and he cannot cast a spell.

hence I included the word 'recommend' in there, it's awefull for a judge (assuming you're in a tournament) to hear a nice story about player A saying he didn't give priority to his/her opponent because he was thinking what to do and player B claiming he had priority because his/her opponent was iddling for about a minute without stating he would keep priority himself. A situation unable for a judge to verify just by himself (god I love spectators every once in a while).

[Nihil Credo]

and player B claiming he had priority because his/her opponent was iddling for about a minute without stating he would keep priority himself.

Claiming this would be useless, since being idle for a long time may mean you get warned for Slow Play, but not that you are assumed to pass priority.

Player B would have to lie and say that you said 'go' or something. However, if your opponent is prepared to flat-out make up stuff like that, there are bigger problems to come ("He said he was Wasting my Volcanic, then changed his mind and tried to take it back and hit Tropical instead!").

[frogboy]

I can't think of a reason B would be allowed to play a spell there; if A hasn't done anything for a minute he would still have priority and B would have no grounds.

A more interesting case: at a recent PTQ, my opponent cast Incindiary Command to murder all creatures. For about ten seconds, I looked at him and he looked at me. Then I said "okay." and binned my creatures. At this point, my opponent realized he had forgotten to use his Fulminator Mage to kill one of my lands. Ruling was because I gave him so long to respond to his own spell before letting it resolve that he was out of luck.

[HammafistRoob]

Because he put Command on the stack and passed priority.

[TrialByFire]

See below. Thinking of wrong situation

[Nihil Credo]

I'm pretty sure that in the some kind of rules somewhere, it says that unless you specifically say that you are retaining priority after playing a spell or ability, it is assumed that you passed priority. Something to do with shortcuts or whatever. This is the way it worked on MODO, you had to press the SHIFT key (CTRL?) while playing things to retain priority or else it automatically passed.
I do not know if such a shortcut rule exists IRL (it doesn't make much sense, IMO, since "Ok?" after playing a spell comes automatically to tournament players), but assuming you are correct, it would still not be very relevant to the example at hand.

There is a huge difference between getting priority after you play a spell or ability, where in 99% of cases you want to just pass priority and see if it resolves, and getting priority after a spell or ability resolves, where you'd basically only pass priority if you want to move to the next step in the turn.

[TrialByFire]

Yea wow I was thinking of the fact of being able to play multiple spells or abilities in a row. Active player absolutely gains priority after resolving a spell or ability though. Edited above

[Ramptoniin]

ok so Krosan Gripping a Pernicious Deed in response to it going off does nothing? And Deed still kills what it is supposed to?


Oh also, What if My opponent is changing Phases going from Main to Attack per se, and I Krosan Grip the Deed at end of Main phase(priority is passed to me) the Grip will kill deed so it cant go off since it has Split Second?

But if my opponent Pops the Deed and I respond with Grip, the deed still goes off?

[DeathScythe]

ok so Krosan Gripping a Pernicious Deed in response to it going off does nothing? And Deed still kills what it is supposed to?


Oh also, What if My opponent is changing Phases going from Main to Attack per se, and I Krosan Grip the Deed at end of Main phase(priority is passed to me) the Grip will kill deed so it cant go off since it has Split Second?

But if my opponent Pops the Deed and I respond with Grip, the deed still goes off?

First things first, deed has sacrificing it in it's cost, so if your oppo uses the deed it will be off the board before you get to launch a grip at it
On the other side if he passes priority and you launch your grip at it he'll probably start moaning as he loses his reset button without able to do anything but using mana abilities.

'I do not know if such a shortcut rule exists IRL (it doesn't make much sense, IMO, since "Ok?" after playing a spell comes automatically to tournament players), but assuming you are correct, it would still not be very relevant to the example at hand. '

there is a shortcut (located at the penalty guidelines, section 50/51 if I remember correctly) which states that if a player adds an object to the stack they are assumed to pass priority unless they state otherwise. Something every TES/Belcher player should be aware of.

True this statement isn't functional when an object resolved but there's quite a few things you can do to pass priority as active player, verbal as non-verbal. Personally if someone glares at me giving me the feeling that he surely isn't thinking something over I more or less asume he passes priority but I always ask just to be sure.

[Elficidium]

ok so Krosan Gripping a Pernicious Deed in response to it going off does nothing? And Deed still kills what it is supposed to?

You can't grip it in responce. The moment you can respond, that activation is on the stack and it's costs have been paid. there is no deed left to Grip.



Oh also, What if My opponent is changing Phases going from Main to Attack per se, and I Krosan Grip the Deed at end of Main phase(priority is passed to me) the Grip will kill deed so it cant go off since it has Split Second?

He will then not have the chance to blow his deed up, because your Grip has Split second, which prohibits him from activating the deed.

And in a recent change, you are now automatically passing priority after you have played a spell unless specifically mentioning that you keep it.


• Whenever a player adds an object to the stack, he or she is assumed to be passing priority unless he or she explicitly announces that he or she intend to retain it.


EDIT: Damn you Deatscythe, being fast and all =(

[Ramptoniin]

Ok, what if I seal of primordium the Deed on my priority, If he activates in response it still goes off then, correct?

Seems like Magic 101, but like I said I havent played regularly in 5+ years, so I want to make sure im getting this stuff right


1 : If deed is sac'd, there is nothing you can do to it to prevent this (short of stifle)

2: If you Krosan Grip A Deed on your priority, Deed Dies and cant be sac'd

3: If you Seal of primordium a deed on your priority, they can sac it in response and it still goes off?

[DeathScythe]

100% correct

[Ramptoniin]

Interesting, thanks guys, this will help me get back in the saddle so to speak :-) I used to know all the rules really well & aspired to be a judge one day, then life took me away from magic for a long time....now I'm back indefinitely :cool:


P.S.
All of this Applies to my turn as well right? Like for some weird reason when it is my turn on my priority, I cant blow up deed with Seal, and it ends up killing deed before it can be sac'd in response? Still only Krosan can do this?

[Elficidium]

P.S.
All of this Applies to my turn as well right? Like for some weird reason when it is my turn on my priority, I cant blow up deed with Seal, and it ends up killing deed before it can be sac'd in response? Still only Krosan can do this?

Before any spell or ability will resolve both players will have priority and have the chance to react. In this case, the opponent would always have the chance of activating his Deed in responce, short of some effect prohibiting him (such as Split Second).

[thefreakaccident]

It all comes down to which of you speaks up first, if you declare attackers and he proceeds to state he is activating his deed, you cannot do anything about it, if you just straight up say, Krosan grip, tap your lands and then target deed, then you get to proceed to beat face.

[Anusien]

It all comes down to which of you speaks up first, if you declare attackers and he proceeds to state he is activating his deed, you cannot do anything about it, if you just straight up say, Krosan grip, tap your lands and then target deed, then you get to proceed to beat face.
In fact it has nothing to do with who speaks up first, but who has priority, which is the discussion of the rest of the thread.

[Finn]

It all comes down to which of you speaks up first, if you declare attackers and he proceeds to state he is activating his deed, you cannot do anything about it, if you just straight up say, Krosan grip, tap your lands and then target deed, then you get to proceed to beat face.No. no. Anusien has it here. The priority system exists to keep this very thing from happening. Otherwise, games would devolve into shouting matches.

[jazzykat]

OK, here's a simple question. I have LED on the table and cast infernal tutor. I have to not pass priority after casting the tutor and blow the LED in order to have it work the way I want to right?

[KrzyMoose]

OK, here's a simple question. I have LED on the table and cast infernal tutor. I have to not pass priority after casting the tutor and blow the LED in order to have it work the way I want to right?

Right.

Say, for example, you play Infernal Tutor and then pass priority (forgetting to retain it). Then, your opponent says "It resolves". You can no longer respond to the Tutor, and must resolve the spell.

So, you have to play the Tutor, say you are retaining priority, and then break the LED.

[thefreakaccident]

In fact it has nothing to do with who speaks up first, but who has priority, which is the discussion of the rest of the thread.

Well... What I was saying is that you should just grip it, because if you give him a response, he will have priority, whereas if you make your move (like playing it before you attack), they will be the one that cannot do anything about it.

[ACME_Myst]

A somewhat different scenario, but still in the context of priority.

Say, it's your opponents turn, you're holding a Grip with 4 lands in play, one of which is a Fetch. Your opponent casts Deed. He then takes a while to think something through. You ask your opponent "While you're thinking, do you mind giving me priority so I can crack my fetch to speed up the game?", he passes priority, and you go "Well, I won't fetch, but I'll Grip your Deed instead."

How would a judge handle that scenario in an actual tournament?

[Van Phanel]

That wouldn't be the nice way but perfectly legal. There is no need to be truthful about future actions. Honestly though: If your opponent is suspecting Grip, he'll even suspect it more then and if he doesn't, then there is no need to even try something like that.

[Nihil Credo]

How would a judge handle that scenario in an actual tournament?
A judge wouldn't. A lynch mob, on the other side...

[Anusien]

A somewhat different scenario, but still in the context of priority.

Say, it's your opponents turn, you're holding a Grip with 4 lands in play, one of which is a Fetch. Your opponent casts Deed. He then takes a while to think something through. You ask your opponent "While you're thinking, do you mind giving me priority so I can crack my fetch to speed up the game?", he passes priority, and you go "Well, I won't fetch, but I'll Grip your Deed instead."
If the opponent said, "Wait, I want to blow Deed!" I would probably be okay with letting him back up. They're basically asking for a shortcut, and then trying to change the shortcut halfway through.

[10:52] <ScottM> as far as I'm concerned, we reject that player's attempt to play priority games, tell him not to try that again, and that it doesn't work


That wouldn't be the nice way but perfectly legal. There is no need to be truthful about future actions. Honestly though: If your opponent is suspecting Grip, he'll even suspect it more then and if he doesn't, then there is no need to even try something like that.
If you don't know for certain it's perfectly legal (for example, asking other judges or checking the Shortcuts section of the PG), please don't comment on the legality of something.

[Van Phanel]

I'm sorry. Just logical thinking and the communication guidelines got me to thinking that.

The guidelines say: You don't have to be honest about future events.

So in the above described situation, how would the following sequence of actions not be legal:

Player A plays Pernicious Deed (resolves) then he thinks about his further actions. Player B says something like: "While you are thinking, may I use my fetchland?" Player A says ok, then Player B says: "You passed priority, so I'll Krosan Grip your Deed."

The "While you are thinking"-part is of absolutely no relevance to the game, it's just some words that player B uses to confuse his opponent about his true purpose of gettnig priority. I'd absolutely say (as above) that I think this is a shady tactic and not very nice, but I just don't see the illegal part. If there is one, please tell me.

[Anusien]

The "While you are thinking"-part is of absolutely no relevance to the game, it's just some words that player B uses to confuse his opponent about his true purpose of gettnig priority. I'd absolutely say (as above) that I think this is a shady tactic and not very nice, but I just don't see the illegal part. If there is one, please tell me.
I posted the reason, including a quote from Scott Marshall! Essentially, you're asking for priority and implying a shortcut to take a mechanical action with little effect on the game state. This is very similar to the "While you're thinking, can I have priority to play a spell? Okay I pass, now we're at the end of your turn!" situation. You're basically suggesting a shortcut and the interrupting it. The thinking is that you're also implying you want priority to fetch and then will pass it right back, so doing something else is very shifty. Anyway, this is the result of discussing it with other judges, so while it's not Official, it is strongly supported (based on the philosophy of the relevant clause in the Shortcuts section of the PG).

[Van Phanel]

I can see the reasoning behind this, I'm sorry about my earlier post then.

By that argumentation though Player B activating a Fetchland and then playing Krosan Grip in response would be alright?

[Wallace]

Here's another one I had come up on MWS today:

I swung with Stillmoon Caviler, he declared no blockers and I pumped the Caviler giving it +2/+0. My opponent Cast Mirrorweve on his 1/1 spirit token in response. So my Caviler became a 1/1 spirit token, then the +1/+0 activations resolved and he was a 3/1.

My opponent argued that it didn't get the +2/+0 because it didn't have the ability anymore. I said it still got +2/+0 because the triggers were on the stack when he cast Mirrorweve...

So who is right?

[Van Phanel]

Again: The ability once activated is independant from its source. Your Spirit will be 3/1

[Anusien]

By that argumentation though Player B activating a Fetchland and then playing Krosan Grip in response would be alright?
It's unclear. I'd let the Deed player back up but that varies more.

Can other sorts of questions please go to a separate thread?

[ACME_Myst]

By what I get from your argumentation, it really seems to come down onto the exact formulation that player A uses. If he would've said 'Do you mind if I crack fetch now while you're thinking?', he doesn't really suggest using it as a shortcut, does he? He's simply asking for priority to crack his fetch. The fact that he will play Grip in response to the activation without passing priority back is simply a smart (though, not really a nice) play.

[Anusien]

By what I get from your argumentation, it really seems to come down onto the exact formulation that player A uses. If he would've said 'Do you mind if I crack fetch now while you're thinking?', he doesn't really suggest using it as a shortcut, does he?
Yes. Any way you ask that suggests you're fetching to save time (or even implying it, really) while the other guy makes a plan is suggesting a shortcut. You're basically suggesting that what you're doing won't effect the game state, and therefore won't change your opponent's line of thought. The standard here for declaring shenanigans and allowing the backing up is pretty low honestly. I think most bluffs that won't work on MTGO probably won't/shouldn't work in paper.