"Name a Card"

[Spade]

Cabal Therapy, Runed Halo, or whatever, when a player plays it and clearly knows what card he's trying to name and what it does, but can't think or doesn't know the name, is that okay? I mean I would always let him go because that seems fair, but out of curiosity what is the official rule?

[Pinder]

As long as they can uniquely identify the card in question, it works even if they can't remember the name quite perfectly. For example, if they wanted to nab a Thirst for Knowledge with Therapy, and they couldn't remember the name, they could say "That blue instant that costs :2::u:, draws three cards, and then you discard two unless you discard an artifact", and it would work just fine.

Also, as a side note, cards are named for Therapy and other similar effects as the spell or ability resolves, so if you're going to counter the spell or ability, you have to do it before they anme a card. If you ask them what they're naming, it's assumed you let the spell or ability resolve.

[Phoenix Ignition]

Similar question. If they can uniquely name what it does but there are two of those card with the same name, what happens? Are they given the 2 names of the card or are they out of luck.

An example is Armageddon and Ravages of War. Also for this scenario assume they don't know the set of either.

[Pinder]

An example is Armageddon and Ravages of War. Also for this scenario assume they don't know the set of either.

For functional reprints, if they don't have a way to clearly distinguish which one they're talking about, then I would assume they can't name it. I'm not really sure about that case specifically, though, because I'm not sure it's ever come up.

edit - Although if you know your opponent is running Armageddon and you say "that 4 mana white sorcery that destroys all lands", I think that's enough because you both know that he isn't running Ravages of War. If he's running both, though, that would make a big difference. A more probable example is if your opponent boarded in both Pyroblast and Red Elemetal Blast. I would think that if you can't get any more specific than "that instant for :r: that counters a blue spell or kills a blue permanent", then you wouldn't be able to name either.

[Jaynel]

For functional reprints, if they don't have a way to clearly distinguish which one they're talking about, then I would assume they can't name it. I'm not really sure about that case specifically, though, because I'm not sure it's ever come up.

edit - Although if you know your opponent is running Armageddon and you say "that 4 mana white sorcery that destroys all lands", I think that's enough because you both know that he isn't running Ravages of War. If he's running both, though, that would make a big difference. A more probable example is if your opponent boarded in both Pyroblast and Red Elemetal Blast. I would think that if you can't get any more specific than "that instant for :r: that counters a blue spell or kills a blue permanent", then you wouldn't be able to name either.

Actually, there is a difference between REB and Pyroblast, and the way in which you describe the card would actually matter.

[freakish777]

For example, if they wanted to nab a Thirst for Knowledge with Therapy, and they couldn't remember the name, they could say "That blue instant that costs :2::u:, draws three cards, and then you discard two unless you discard an artifact", and it would work just fine.


For reference, you should call a judge over and confirm the name of "That blue instant that costs :2::u:, draws three cards, and then you discard two unless you discard an artifact" before actually doing that so there isn't any confusion from your opponent.

[Pinder]

Actually, there is a difference between REB and Pyroblast, and the way in which you describe the card would actually matter.

Oh, I know. One of them destroys target blue permanent and the other destroys target permanent if it is blue. But if you can't make that distinction between the two, I don't think you would be able to name either.

[Tosh]

I have a question... Say you board in Armageddon and the opponent plays Cabal Therapy and describes "the white sorcery for 4 that destroys all land". Since you board it in, the opponent doesn't know if you play Armageddon or Ravages of War and neither does the judge. Would it be unsportsman-like conduct to ask which "white sorcery for 4 that destroys all land" your opponent is referring to. Additionally, how would a judge know all functional but differently named cards.

[frogboy]

"the white sorcery for 4 that destroys all land".

this =! unique identification.

[Tosh]

this =! unique identification.

In most situations, most people would accept that as a unique identification.

[Nihil Credo]

In most situations, most people would accept that as a unique identification.
Assuming they would, they would be wrong. Mind-tricking the opponent into calling Ravages of War is precisely the type of play that wins games.

[frogboy]

In most situations, most people would accept that as a unique identification.

Well, in most situations it is a unique identification, heh.

[Taurelin]

Is it possible to ask the judge "Hey, I know there are two different white sorceries for 4 that destroy all lands. But I can't remember their names. Can you tell me both?" and then name one of them?

[Anusien]

Is it possible to ask the judge "Hey, I know there are two different white sorceries for 4 that destroy all lands. But I can't remember their names. Can you tell me both?" and then name one of them?
Good enough for me.

[Tosh]

Well, in most situations it is a unique identification, heh.

My question is, how can your opponent distinguish between the two? Given that your opponent is just guessing and that he hasn't seen any before, how can he tell if that description is a unique ID?

[AngryTroll]

If you are holding a handful of Red Blasts, and your opponent Therapies you, and asks for "That one mana red instant that counters a blue spell or destroys a blue permenent", you have a couple of options:

1) "Oh, you mean Pyroblast?"
2) "You've described both Pyroblast and Red Elemental Blast. Which do you mean?"

Option 1 seems to be flirting with cheating. Is it? I'd go with option two, or call a judge as soon as the question came up.

[DeathwingZERO]

Option one is not flirting with cheating, it's giving adequate enough information, without giving all of it.

From what I remember dealing with a judge ruling, it is possible for them to look up the oracle wording for you to give you the name. Assuming this is actually the case, it would seem that they would also allow you to know the name of both in the case of Armageddon and Ravages.

Any judges know if there's anything otherwise?

[Anusien]

"How do I know it's a unique identification?" If there's any question about it, you can search Gatherer. Or, imagine you say "That one mana red instant that counters a blue spell or destroys a blue permenent" and your opponent says "You mean Pyroblast?" I suggest actually gettnig the Oracle for Pyroblast to see if that's the card you want.

P.S., Option 1 here wouldn't be cheating if you were being honest. But I suggest not trying to mislead anyone by purpose (or even by accident). Just get a judge involved as soon as possible.

[Frenger]

P.S., Option 1 here wouldn't be cheating if you were being honest. But I suggest not trying to mislead anyone by purpose (or even by accident). Just get a judge involved as soon as possible.

So its not cheating, even if you have 4 red blasts in your hand? I don't see how you could be honest and say "Oh you mean pyroblast?" when you've got REBs in your hand.

[Anusien]

So its not cheating, even if you have 4 red blasts in your hand? I don't see how you could be honest and say "Oh you mean pyroblast?" when you've got REBs in your hand.
If you're intentionally misrepresenting the Oracle text in order to gain an advantage, yeah that's Cheating. If you're not playing any of them at all and you're answering honestly, that's not Cheating.
Let me be clear here; it might be possible to answer in a way that's not Cheating. But if you try and obscure the fact that there is another card with similar text, that's quite bad.

Like I said, just get a judge involved and save everyone some hassle.