Cabal Therapy gamesmanship

[AcidFiend]

I was having this discussion with some friends and wanted to share it here. What are people's thoughts on saying a card name while playing Cabal Therapy? Example:

Player 1: Play Cabal Therapy, announce "Force of Will". Then ask "Resolves?"
Player 2: "Ok, resolves"
Player 1: "CT resolves, I name 'Merrow Rejeery'"

Is this ok? Technically anything you say before CT resolves couldn't count as the 'named card' could it? The idea being if they let the spell resolve, there might be less chance they have that card in hand.

[Forbiddian]

If you name a card, you can't change the decision if your opponent passes priority.

I will look up if you're allowed to change the name if your opponent does something with his priority. I think that you can.

[dorsch]

If you cast therapy and name a card right away and your oponent passes priority right back, you can not change the named card.
If you cast therapy and name a card right away and your oponent responds with anything, you might name a different card during resolution.

The relevant rules text:

If a player casts a spell or activates an ability and announces choices for it that are not normally made until resolution, the player must adhere to those choices unless an opponent responds to that spell or ability. If an opponent inquires about choices made during resolution, that player is assumed to be passing priority and allowing that spell or ability to resolve.

A player may interrupt a tournament shortcut by explaining how he or she is deviating from it or at which point in the middle he or she wishes to take an action. If the players are confused by the use of a tournament shortcut, they should be backed up to the beginning of the shortcut [...]

[AcidFiend]

dorsch - great find, thanks! Now I know that if I say Force of Will early, and they Brainstorm, and I change it.

[Forbiddian]

dorsch - great find, thanks! Now I know that if I say Force of Will early, and they Brainstorm, and I change it.

Why wouldn't you just follow the default and not name a card until resolution?

[cdr]

dorsch - great find, thanks! Now I know that if I say Force of Will early, and they Brainstorm, and I change it.

That is acceptable, but be careful that you go no further in trying to get your opponent to think that the choice is made on announcement - deliberate misrepresentation is Cheating.

[Malchar]

Why wouldn't you just follow the default and not name a card until resolution?

He does this because he wants his opponent to think that he's choosing Force of Will. When the opponent uses his Brainstorm to put his FoW's on the top of his library, then the original player chooses a different card for Cabal Therapy assuming that all the FoW's are on top of his opponent's library and thus dodging the therapy. Both player's actions are rather dubious, but anyone who knows the rules will not make such a mistake as the opponent in this situation has.

[4eak]

Tricksy hobbitses.

Good to know this--I don't want to get caught with my pants down. Admittedly, I think this sort of play is against the spirit of competition.




peace,
4eak

[Koby]

How about the scenario on the flip side:

Suppose your opponent casts Therapy and names a card before resolution? What is the best way to resolve this assuming you do want to respond to the spell? Would calling a judge just be the best scenario, and what if they do change the named card?

[Tha Gunslinga]

I'd just inform my opponent that you name the card upon resolution, then I'd ask who they're targeting, then I'd decide whether I had responses. Once the card is resolving they can name the same or a different card.

[Anusien]

How about the scenario on the flip side:

Suppose your opponent casts Therapy and names a card before resolution? What is the best way to resolve this assuming you do want to respond to the spell? Would calling a judge just be the best scenario, and what if they do change the named card?
If you want to respond, respond. But you get to decide whether to respond or not knowing what they're locked into naming.

[Forbiddian]

He does this because he wants his opponent to think that he's choosing Force of Will. When the opponent uses his Brainstorm to put his FoW's on the top of his library, then the original player chooses a different card for Cabal Therapy assuming that all the FoW's are on top of his opponent's library and thus dodging the therapy. Both player's actions are rather dubious, but anyone who knows the rules will not make such a mistake as the opponent in this situation has.

You're not allowed to play technically incorrectly intentionally to gain an advantage.

I think you could get away with this one, since I still don't see even a possible advantage, but just beware that even if the rules grant a contingency for the misplay, if you're gaining an advantage from the sloppy play, it could be ruled as game rule violation or unsporting behavior (if you try to trick your opponent into making a technically incorrect play). If you're doing it intentionally to gain an edge, it could be ruled cheating.


But from less of a rules perspective and more a "playing Magic well" perspective: In the example you gave, there's absolutely no reason to commit to the Force of Will first. If you name Force of Will and then he Brainstorms BECAUSE you named Force of Will (to put his Forces on top), you were clearly better off not letting your opponent know you were going to name Force on the offchance that he thinks you'll name something else and you'll whiff. When you commit to Force of Will, he knows he has to Brainstorm them away.

But on the flip side, if he doesn't have Force of Will, then he can save his Brainstorm for a better use, whereas he might Brainstorm thinking you'd name a different spell, or just because he's not sure. I see no advantage from this play. I can't think of any situations where prenaming the spell would help, and the above example highlights how it could screw you over.

[dorsch]

You're not allowed to play technically incorrectly intentionally to gain an advantage.

You are allowed to use tournament shortcuts. It is very legal to use tournament shortcuts suggested by the tournament rules.

If a player casts a spell or activates an ability and announces choices for it that are not normally made until resolution, the player must adhere to those choices unless an opponent responds to that spell or ability. If an opponent inquires about choices made during resolution, that player is assumed to be passing priority and allowing that spell or ability to resolve.
You are allowed to use your rules knowledge to gain an advantage over your opponent.
Using "GO!" as a shortcut for "I will pass priority until we reach my end of turn step" is also intentional technical incorrect playing and gains you an advantage. (the advantage of not having to waste time and talk a lot)

BUT versus any half-decent player it is very stupid to name the card during casting cabal therapy. Your opponent might had played that brainstorm if you didn't say a word, but now he knows you have to stick by your decision and will discard nothing and save the brainstorm for later. Even if he has both Brainstorm and Force of Will in his hand, he might see through your trick (beacuse he reads the source too) and will play brainstorm, hiding some other cards and leaving Force in hand.

[Malchar]

But from less of a rules perspective and more a "playing Magic well" perspective: In the example you gave, there's absolutely no reason to commit to the Force of Will first. If you name Force of Will and then he Brainstorms BECAUSE you named Force of Will (to put his Forces on top), you were clearly better off not letting your opponent know you were going to name Force on the offchance that he thinks you'll name something else and you'll whiff. When you commit to Force of Will, he knows he has to Brainstorm them away.

But on the flip side, if he doesn't have Force of Will, then he can save his Brainstorm for a better use, whereas he might Brainstorm thinking you'd name a different spell, or just because he's not sure. I see no advantage from this play. I can't think of any situations where prenaming the spell would help, and the above example highlights how it could screw you over.

There are a few - albiet rare - hypermeta situations where it could be beneficial to fake call-out Force of Will. If you call out any card, let your opponent hide them with Brainstorm, and then name a different card, you slightly increase your odds of hitting something. If the opponent doesn't have any FoW's, they can still Brainstorm to make you think that they are putting FoW's on top of their library. Or, if they wanted to be really tricky, they could Brainstorm and keep their FoW's knowing that you'll probably change what you've named. Does the small chance of actually getting an advantage from this outweigh the bad sportsmanship? Probably not.

[Forbiddian]

You are allowed to use tournament shortcuts. It is very legal to use tournament shortcuts suggested by the tournament rules.

You are allowed to use your rules knowledge to gain an advantage over your opponent.
Using "GO!" as a shortcut for "I will pass priority until we reach my end of turn step" is also intentional technical incorrect playing and gains you an advantage. (the advantage of not having to waste time and talk a lot)

BUT versus any half-decent player it is very stupid to name the card during casting cabal therapy. Your opponent might had played that brainstorm if you didn't say a word, but now he knows you have to stick by your decision and will discard nothing and save the brainstorm for later. Even if he has both Brainstorm and Force of Will in his hand, he might see through your trick (beacuse he reads the source too) and will play brainstorm, hiding some other cards and leaving Force in hand.

Both of your examples are correct plays. Neither does anything to undermine my argument. It's actually probably illegal to state the "I will pass priority..." thing because the only reason you'd do that is stalling.

In this case, I'm not talking about shortcuts, I'm talking about doing things incorrectly. Technically correct doesn't demand that you do things without shortcuts (that's absolutely retarded, games would take 2 hours each, I even wonder how you could possibly construe that technically correct play = no shortcuts), it means that the actions you take are performed correctly (usually it's just about the order of things taking place and being clear with your opponent).

You're not allowed to play technically incorrectly to gain an advantage.

[AcidFiend]

Forbiddian: Going over a few more scenarios in my head I see what you mean about it not giving any advantage. I do like discussing things like this though that relate to gameplay, as its generally less dicussed than things like decklists.



Admittedly, I think this sort of play is against the spirit of competition.



Rules can be bent, and doing so can give you an advantage over your opponent. If your opponent did the same thing to win a championship, would you be happy with 2nd knowing at least you played with what you thought was the correct spirit of competition?

A small divergence: In UFC, you are not allowed to grab the cage. Usually you get a warning first, then perhaps a 2nd warning or a point deducted. The point is, when you are about to be thrown to the ground, its almost always worth grabbing the cage if its going to increase your chances of not being thrown. You've intentionally broke the rules but you know the gain outweighs the penalty (of a warning). As a result, most fighters will do this given the chance. If they wanted to stamp it out, they could change the rules to enforce a harsher penalty. As it is, its basically part of the fight game.

Point I'm trying to make is, if you are playing to win against others doing the same, there will always be some people bending the rules to their advantage. Not doing so you simply disadvantage yourself (although you can take comfort in some kind of utopian high ground if thats your thing). Though to follow the analogy through, perhaps you were suggesting this is more akin to a low-blow than grabbing the cage.

[Anusien]

The UFC analogy is pretty terrible. Intentionally breaking the rules to gain advantage will get you disqualified. There is a wide range of conduct that is not unsporting but may not be sporting to exploit. Stay inside that range.

[Adan]

dorsch - great find, thanks! Now I know that if I say Force of Will early, and they Brainstorm, and I change it.

Well, apparently you can do this, but mind that it will make you look like an asshole if you do that too often.

And on the other side, it can also be an andvantage for the opponent. If someone casts Therapy and announces a card that is irrelevant, I'd not respond and jst reveal my hand (and maybe discard the chaff). If my opponent would keep his mouth shut until resolution, I'd maybe cast Brainstorm before it resolves.

[nodahero]

I came up with a reason to intentionally name a card before going off albeit the example seems unlikely to come up... You Cabal naming Force right off the bat. They brainstorm to hide Force. You then change to some generic counterspell of your choice to possibly get rid of all their coutners for the turn buying you time to combo off in the turn... Unlikely example but it does demonstrate a possibly reason to do so.