Did I cheat?

[Genericcactus]

At a tournament over the summer, I did/allowed a play that my brother insists is cheating. What do you all think?

I'm playing Canadian Thresh and my opponent is playing Affinity. I have a 5/6 Goyf in play and a Wipe Away in hand. At 8 life. My opponent is swinging with a Master of Etherium that is a 7/7, a Frogmite (3/3 w/ Master), and a Ravenger that is currently a 3/3 (4/4 w/ Master). Assuming my opponent is going to make the correct play, I block Master w/ Goyf. If he sacks an artifact to Ravenger, I'm dead on board, but i plan on casting Wipe Away on Ravenger is response to the sac, making his Master a 5/5, killing it in combat, and resulting in me only taking 3, and having a pretty decent board position. After blocks he passes priority. Fuck. While thinking about the next move, he says "I could have killed you couldn't I?" I smile, and say "You can take it back if you want." He thinks, agrees, and sacs an artifact land Ravenger, which allows me to execute my plan. Next turn I Ponder into Goyf and I end up winning.

What I did was clearly a dick move. I also stand by my decision. In almost any instance, a player allowing another player to take something back is considered generous (usually foolish in a competitive event) but to my knowledge, it's allowed. Did I cheat?

[Ectoplasm]

I'm pretty sure it's not even legal to take back moves :(

[tivadar]

It's issues like this that annoy me (with the rules, not with your situation). Technically though, people aren't really supposed to take back moves outside of something like "I attack with him, no wait, him". This was brought up recently, in that you're not allowed to take back a move if you've had time to read anything from your opponent.

As for allowing him to, well, I don't see why it should be cheating. He changed his mind about what he wanted to do and you allowed him to. Granted, it might be a procedural breach (if you weren't supposed to allow him to) and a warning. But either way, this shouldn't be called as cheating. You're not lying to him about what a card does, or misleading him about the rules, or stacking your deck in any particular way. What you're doing is essentially bluffing being nice :-P.

EDIT: That being said, never take back a move if your opponent allows you to at a big tournament. Most likely they know something you don't. Assume that your mistake might actually help you.

[chokin]

Against friends, even at tournaments, I allow them to take back some things if it won't affect a whole lot. Like if they play a land, then decide they wanted a different one before playing a different card.

One thing scenario where I didn't let my friend take something back was wirng a Nantuko Shade.
He swings, I have no blockers, he taps out all but two lands to pump his Shade and I STP it. He got mad. I told him he should have let the ability resolve one by one. He never made the mistake again.

These things rarely happen now, as we've all gotten a lot better, but on occasions we let things slide here and there.

[cdr]

No, you were not "cheating". Cheating (capital C) means a few very specific things, which are outlined in the IPG.

While technically you are not allowed to "take back" plays, if both players agree, there's not much a judge can do.



One thing scenario where I didn't let my friend take something back was wirng a Nantuko Shade.
He swings, I have no blockers, he taps out all but two lands to pump his Shade and I STP it. He got mad. I told him he should have let the ability resolve one by one. He never made the mistake again.

He doesn't have to let the ability resolve "one by one". Per the shortcut rules, he's assumed to be doing that by default.

[Phoenix Ignition]

Against friends, even at tournaments, I allow them to take back some things if it won't affect a whole lot. Like if they play a land, then decide they wanted a different one before playing a different card.


What's the relevant ruling on something like a fetchland. If a player cracks a fetch, goes through their library, puts one down, then before shuffling puts it back in and grabs a different land is this okay?

[cdr]

What's the relevant ruling on something like a fetchland. If a player cracks a fetch, goes through their library, puts one down, then before shuffling puts it back in and grabs a different land is this okay?

Yes.

[sunshine]

He doesn't have to let the ability resolve "one by one". Per the shortcut rules, he's assumed to be doing that by default.

I'm thinking that what he meant by "letting them resolve one by one" was letting each resolve individually before putting the next on the stack rather than putting all the activations on the stack before passing priority.

If my opponent makes _x black mana then indicates that his Shade gets _x pump activations, at which point I cast StP targeting the Shade, he should not be allowed to then say that I must be responding to the first activation (that is to say before any of the others actually went on the stack), correct? Another way to ask the same question that might be less confusing: if I say "pump shade _x times" does that imply that I do so without passing priority? Certainly seems like it should be the case - and does the answer change depending on whose turn it is?

[Nessaja]

The thing is here is an actual shortcut that describes exactly the action of passing priority in between activations. As cdr said he is assumed to be doing exactly that my default so he doesn't need to ask "Ok?" after every activation.

What you two are saying is exactly what this shortcut is about - if all mana is tapped for x activations of an ability priority is passed between each activation because of this shortcut.

[cdr]

4.2 Tournament Shortcuts

...

• 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. If he or she adds a group of objects to the stack without explicitly retaining priority and a player wishes to take an action at a point in the middle, the actions should be reversed up to that point.

If you "pump X times", it is exactly the same as "pump, resolve, pump, resolve". If someone else wants to respond, they can choose which activation to respond to.

[Forbiddian]

Good call.

But the default is that if you don't specify in some way that you're retaining priority, you pass priority by default.

It makes all the split second cards (esp Trickbind) work. It also prevents people from getting screwed by saccing their board to a Ravager.

[Obfuscate Freely]

It's probably worth noting that this was not always the case. In fact, the opposite used to be true, and you were assumed to be retaining priority between actions if you announced multiple spells or abilities at once.

Thus, if you carelessly binned your entire hand before indicating a lethal Wild Mongrel, you opened yourself up to getting wrecked by Shock; now, you can only cartwheel into that Shock if you explicitly state that you want to (watch out for that Trickbind!).

[cdr]

This is true. The shortcut rules have been in effect for a couple of years now though, so it's time to give them a read if you haven't (http://www.wizards.com/dci/downloads/MTG_IPG_1Oct09_EN.pdf).

In fact, that entire document - the Magic Tournament Rules - is the part of the rules you as a tournament player are supposed to know.

[tivadar]

Why was this changed out of curiosity? My ravager incident probably happened more than 2 years ago thinking back. So yes, sorry for being wrong. Not particularly sorry for not knowing every rule. Let's face it, these rules plus the comprehensive is what, 200 pages or so?

And it really does seem counterintuitive that you have to explicitely state you're *not* passing priority if you want to do that...

[cdr]

No problem. Again though, shortcuts are a tournament rule, not a game rule.

At least part of why the shortcut was defined was because it was counterintuitive to most players to have to individually resolve abilities.

[Forbiddian]

No problem. Again though, shortcuts are a tournament rule, not a game rule.

At least part of why the shortcut was defined was because it was counterintuitive to most players to have to individually resolve abilities.

And because one too many deck boxes were thrown across the room when Psychatog got Lightning Bolted.

The changes definitely make the game better.

[Mantis]

Very good to know, I always explicitly stated when I wanted to pass in between and not when I wanted to retain priority. Strange that it has never negatively impacted me, I guess most people aren't aware anyway and figure they won't take the risk to lose being on the receiving end or just don't want to be rules lawerying dicks I guess.

Also, am I right that it is in fact legal to take back the way you tap your mana before you put anything on the stack? Thus, you tap Forest + Island, but quickly figure out it's better to tap Forest + Mountain for your Tarmogoyf but you haven't put it on the stack yet.

[majikal]

Also, am I right that it is in fact legal to take back the way you tap your mana before you put anything on the stack? Thus, you tap Forest + Island, but quickly figure out it's better to tap Forest + Mountain for your Tarmogoyf but you haven't put it on the stack yet.
Yeah that's perfectly legal. Even MTGO has an "undo" button specifically for that reason.

[cdr]

Also, am I right that it is in fact legal to take back the way you tap your mana before you put anything on the stack? Thus, you tap Forest + Island, but quickly figure out it's better to tap Forest + Mountain for your Tarmogoyf but you haven't put it on the stack yet.

Yes; you're free to change your mind until you do something. Real Magic does handle it pretty much like MTGO's Undo command.