Guerilla Tactics

[Vacrix]

Lately I've been thinking about ways to psyche out the opponent before we actually begin playing. I usually play combo but at big tournaments I usually take a glass house like Pact SI (and I'm 2 for 2 at topping 8 at larger tournaments). A few times during my years playing magic, I've put myself in a good position just by being a little tricky before the match actually begins. For example, during the last tournament I brought a clear case full of extra cards with me and kept a Hypnotic Spectre on the top. One guy actually called me out on it and said I probably shouldn't reveal what I'm playing by keeping my extra cards out in the open (though I was actually playing combo).
In that same tournament, I accidentally dropped Dryad Arbor and my opponent thought I was playing NO bant (cause they run it as a fetchable outlet for Natural Order).
Another time (unrelated to the last tournament), I 'dropped' a Burning Wish and a Bayou while Shuffling. My opponent was convinced I was playing Aggro Loam and kept what he called 'a decent hand against me'. Apparently, he mulliganed a hand with Chalice and he was playing first.

My question is, how much do you think this affects YOU? If your opponent accidentally drops something while shuffling, will you change your initial strategy? And how?

My goal is to discover which combinations of cards are worth 'dropping' to make my opponent think I'm playing something else. In doing so, I might force a mulligan or the wrong play. Especially when playing something like combo (I play Pact SI) where the game will be decided in the first couple turns, might it even be worth cutting one of my open slots in the MD for something to throw my opponent off completely?

Also, are there any other strategies I might engage in? Example: Start a conversation about the last match, and explain that 'I didn't have the FoW for his Lackey' or something.

Discuss.

[Fuzzy]

On last Extended PTQ season, I was playing Zoo with few Thopter tokens turned up on my deckbox. I won 2 first games that I shouldn't because that.

Because that, I aways ignore any "outside" information (Except obvious things, like a Golgari Grave-Troll or something)

[xTrainx]

It tends to work better at larger tournaments - at more local ones people tend to know your deck.

However, I did play a game vs. ANT that went like this: "Well, this is pretty easy, because I know you don't have Forces." Me: "Nope, my friend just lent to me." "Really?"

He proceeded to wait a turn before Duressing me, and took my Daze. He went to combo out, and with that extra blue mana I got to say: Brainstorm, say hi to my other Daze.

[Vacrix]

Ah tokens. Thats a pretty good idea. I could put some Zombie tokens in my deck box and pretend I'm playing Dredge.

Agreed. It works much better at the larger tournaments. Then again everyone knows me as the Storm guy so the one time I played DnT, I fucked shit up with Plains, go. :P

[Nidd]

Ah tokens. Thats a pretty good idea. I could put some Zombie tokens in my deck box and pretend I'm playing Dredge.

Agreed. It works much better at the larger tournaments. Then again everyone knows me as the Storm guy so the one time I played DnT, I fucked shit up with Plains, go. :P
Haha, alright, everyone here knows I either bring Storm or Dredge. Shit was cash when I made that play: Mountain, Lackey, go.

On topic: Nothing beats the confusion caused by Zombie tokens, I agree. Many people just go batshit and feel very nervous because they think they're playing Dredge.

[cjva]

These kinds of tactics might be good, but i believe that you should focus more on yore game instead of trying to figure out ways to mind game your opponent. More rewards from that in the long run.

I'm one of the guys who try to use outside info (like tokens etc). Sometimes Iv had people pulling this stunt against me, but its most of the time rather easy to understand what the opponent is doing, slightly different tone of voice, difference in confidence etc.

[pointofinfo]

All of this seems like a waste of time. Numerous pro players have suggested that you are more likely to succeed if you concentrate on your technical play, rather than spending your mental resources on non-gameplay elements of a match. In my personal opinion, if you can't just play the game for the fun of playing the game, then you should try poker (where it is an accepted practice to use misinformation to fool opponents). In the case of Magic, you're just forfeiting your reputation as a person. There was a guy at the last tourney I went to who was using a clear deck box with an Ill-Gotten Gains on top. He succeeded in convincing me he was playing a Storm deck, so I took two mulligans to find a Stifle and a counter. He turned out to be playing Dredge. I called a judge, and he was given a loss for having cards in his deck box that could be swapped illegally. My point is not to accuse you of cheating (because this isn't, to the best of my knowledge), but to point out that just because this isn't illegal doesn't mean it isn't amoral. Furthermore, I won our only game because I Cursecatcher'd his Dread Return with 3 Bridges in the grave because he didn't know the RFG clause.

[ktkenshinx]

All of this seems like a waste of time. Numerous pro players have suggested that you are more likely to succeed if you concentrate on your technical play, rather than spending your mental resources on non-gameplay elements of a match. In my personal opinion, if you can't just play the game for the fun of playing the game, then you should try poker (where it is an accepted practice to use misinformation to fool opponents). In the case of Magic, you're just forfeiting your reputation as a person. There was a guy at the last tourney I went to who was using a clear deck box with an Ill-Gotten Gains on top. He succeeded in convincing me he was playing a Storm deck, so I took two mulligans to find a Stifle and a counter. He turned out to be playing Dredge. I called a judge, and he was given a loss for having cards in his deck box that could be swapped illegally. My point is not to accuse you of cheating (because this isn't, to the best of my knowledge), but to point out that just because this isn't illegal doesn't mean it isn't amoral. Furthermore, I won our only game because I Cursecatcher'd his Dread Return with 3 Bridges in the grave because he didn't know the RFG clause.

I agree that this is a real problem. Judges are not exactly fond of such tactics and mind tricks, and dropping cards from a deck that should not have those cards can get you into hot water. This is especially true in larger tournaments (which is where people agree that mind tricks work the best).

That said, there are a certain type of mind trick that I find both highly effective and completely outside of a judge's notice. Indeed, this sort of mind trick uses the judge (if necessary) to beat your opponent. These are "In-Game" tactics that happen during actual gameplay. Of those "in-game" tactics, my absolute favorite are unquestionably those that deal with the upkeep. Judges are serious sticklers about remembering what triggers during upkeeps, and they have very little pity for a player who forgets to deal with optional triggers. This is true of all phases, but happens most frequently during the upkeep (and Draw step, if you are playing Dredge).

In general, Magic guerillas should be highly abusive of ALL optional triggers. Here are some examples of these tactics in action:

1. The Tabernacle Ploy
I have a Magus of the Tabernacle out and my opponent is playing Zoo with 4 creatures in play. The Zoo player has 4 mana available to pay for all of his dudes and I know I'm not going to survive another mass swing. At the end of my turn, I tell the player "pause during your upkeep." My opponent untaps and pauses as per my request. The Magus triggers are not controlled by me, so I have no obligation to remind my opponent that those are sitting dangerously on the stack while I ponder what to do. I am pretending to think about whether to tap lands with Rishadan Port or Wasteland one of his non-basics. Obviously, this will have no impact on his ability to pay for his dudes. While I pretend to fiddle with my lands and engage in calculations for the next fifteen seconds, my opponent slowly forgets his Magus triggers. After those 15 or so seconds have elapsed, I say, "Nevermind, go ahead." Most players invariably proceed to the Draw Step and lose their creatures.

If a judge is called over, you have a bulletproof story ("I was debating on whether to tap his lands/destroy them") and a rock solid rules position (the Zoo player forgot his triggers and his creatures are definitely screwed).

2. Counterbalance Confusion
I'm playing Reanimator against CounterTop, and my opponent has an active lock out. I know that I'm pretty much fucked unless I can resolve an Exhume, and I'm not going to try and stick around waiting for a Reanimate to come so I can play one and then the other; he might have a FoW by that time. I take my chances with the Exhume. Before he can stack triggers (Counterbalance first, then a Top activation/Brainstorm), I tell him "I'm not passing priority yet." I then pause for about twenty seconds to think about something. I then call a judge over and use my player rights to ask him a discrete question off to the side (the question itself doesn't matter, so long as it's pertinent to the game). I come back, apologize to my opponent, think a little more, and then I declare that "I am pooling three mana". This series of unusual actions results in his having a puzzled look on his face, but he nonetheless proceeds to reveal the top card (CMC 1), attempt to FoW, and then meets up with my own FoW. Exhume resolves and I win. Later he realizes he forget to activate Top, and as we see right after he concedes, he would have hit a Counterbalance.

By interrupting the normal train of triggers by NOT passing priority and then summoning a judge to have a secret conversation with, I disrupted my opponent's normal game play. So long as you have a legitimate question for the judge and you can prove that you were actually thinking about some in-game situation, your opponent cannot call you out for stalling, and cannot call you out for disrupting his gameplay.

These are two examples of in-game tactics that work quite well in swinging matches back in your favor. Including cards in your deck can be shady; if I was in a large tournament and I knew my opponent was playing Tempo Thresh, and I recalled that he had dropped Bayou/Infernal Tutor from his deck during shuffling, I would absolutely call a judge over on the grounds of potential card swapping and deck rigging. In-game tactics, instead of working against judges, USE judges to your advantage.

Moral? Not exactly. Effective? Yes.

-ktkenshinx-

[AngryTroll]

(slimy strategy tips)

Those two ideas are at least stalling. They're probably downright cheating, and they're certainly unsporting conduct.

Leave that kind of strategy at home, or stay home yourself.

[Julian23]

1. The Tabernacle Ploy
I have a Magus of the Tabernacle out and my opponent is playing Zoo with 4 creatures in play. The Zoo player has 4 mana available to pay for all of his dudes and I know I'm not going to survive another mass swing. At the end of my turn, I tell the player "pause during your upkeep." My opponent untaps and pauses as per my request. The Magus triggers are not controlled by me, so I have no obligation to remind my opponent that those are sitting dangerously on the stack while I ponder what to do. I am pretending to think about whether to tap lands with Rishadan Port or Wasteland one of his non-basics. Obviously, this will have no impact on his ability to pay for his dudes. While I pretend to fiddle with my lands and engage in calculations for the next fifteen seconds, my opponent slowly forgets his Magus triggers. After those 15 or so seconds have elapsed, I say, "Nevermind, go ahead." Most players invariably proceed to the Draw Step and lose their creatures.

Know what you should do instead? Pass priority and watch his creatures die. With the triggers already on the stack and him pausing during his upkeep while waiting for you to do something is a clear indication that he passed priority to you. I guess I would (almost) never try to pull such a trick and I HIGHLY doubt this would work against any kind of above-average player.

[cdr]

For example, during the last tournament I brought a clear case full of extra cards with me and kept a Hypnotic Spectre on the top. One guy actually called me out on it and said I probably shouldn't reveal what I'm playing by keeping my extra cards out in the open (though I was actually playing combo).
In that same tournament, I accidentally dropped Dryad Arbor and my opponent thought I was playing NO bant (cause they run it as a fetchable outlet for Natural Order).


If you have 'extra cards' with your deck/board in a box, those cards are considered to be part of your sideboard. If they're not with your deck but you imply they're part of your sideboard, they're considered to be part of your sideboard. Deck/Decklist Mismatch = Game Loss.

I hope the Arbor was actually in your deck.


There was a guy at the last tourney I went to who was using a clear deck box with an Ill-Gotten Gains on top. He succeeded in convincing me he was playing a Storm deck, so I took two mulligans to find a Stifle and a counter. He turned out to be playing Dredge. I called a judge, and he was given a loss for having cards in his deck box that could be swapped illegally.

Yep. See above.


If a judge is called over, you have a bulletproof story ("I was debating on whether to tap his lands/destroy them") and a rock solid rules position (the Zoo player forgot his triggers and his creatures are definitely screwed).

Don't lie to a judge, about anything. That's a DQ. Wanting to get a DQ when you were otherwise not doing anything illegal seems silly.


By interrupting the normal train of triggers by NOT passing priority and then summoning a judge to have a secret conversation with, I disrupted my opponent's normal game play. So long as you have a legitimate question for the judge and you can prove that you were actually thinking about some in-game situation, your opponent cannot call you out for stalling, and cannot call you out for disrupting his gameplay.

Do not waste judges' time. Do not try to involve judges in bluffs. The first time, you will be told politely not to do that. The second time, it will be a Game Loss for Unsporting Conduct. And again, do not lie to judges.


Those two ideas are at least stalling. They're probably downright cheating, and they're certainly unsporting conduct.

Stalling is Cheating by trying to take advantage of the time limit, which those are not. Cheating is one of four things, none of which those are. They're not Unsporting Conduct either, save where they try to involve judges.


Know what you should do instead? Pass priority and watch his creatures die.

If you pass priority, the top item of the stack will resolve - not everything on the stack.

[AngryTroll]

Those two ideas are at least stalling. They're probably downright cheating, and they're certainly unsporting conduct.

Leave that kind of strategy at home, or stay home yourself.



Stalling is Cheating by trying to take advantage of the time limit, which those are not. Cheating is one of four things, none of which those are. They're not Unsporting Conduct either, save where they try to involve judges.


Sorry, I meant "unsporting conduct," not "Unsporting Conduct." I mean it's a not a sporting thing to do, it's rude, and I'd probably get annoyed and call a judge.

Isn't wasting both players time to try and get the opponent to screw something up stalling? He's delaying the game to try and get an advantage.

[cdr]

Sorry, I meant "unsporting conduct," not "Unsporting Conduct." I mean it's a not a sporting thing to do, it's rude, and I'd probably get annoyed and call a judge.

Isn't wasting both players time to try and get the opponent to screw something up stalling? He's delaying the game to try and get an advantage.

I'd stick to just "unsporting" (leave off the conduct) to help avoid confusion. Or maybe even better "not sporting".

Stalling is specifically trying to take advantage of the time limit. If the (potential) advantage you gain is not related to the time limit, it's not Stalling.

[ktkenshinx]

Don't lie to a judge, about anything. That's a DQ. Wanting to get a DQ when you were otherwise not doing anything illegal seems silly.
I am not lying to judges at all. I was debating on what to do during my opponent's upkeep; tap lands so he can't use them in his main phase, or destroy lands for the same effect. Lying to a judge is clearly a bad idea, and I would never do that or approve of it.

Do not waste judges' time. Do not try to involve judges in bluffs. The first time, you will be told politely not to do that. The second time, it will be a Game Loss for Unsporting Conduct. And again, do not lie to judges.
I am merely asking the judge a question about how passing priority and trigger stacking works in a complicated situation. This is a rules clarification, not a lie or a bluff.

Isn't wasting both players time to try and get the opponent to screw something up stalling? He's delaying the game to try and get an advantage.
I am spending a few seconds to try and figure out my next move (destroy a land? tap a land? stack triggers? pass priority? etc.) Matches are "stalled" for much longer over debating about what to do in an attack phase, how to execute a game winning play, etc. My delaying the game in the Tabernacle/CounterTop scenario is no different than delaying the game when considering an important strategic move. The outcome just happens to impact the forgetful opponent.

As to the issue of unsporting, you really can't post in a thread like this and say "That tactic is bad because it's unsporting." You certainly can object to the whole idea of so-called mind tricks and "guerilla tactics" on that ground, but that's a separate debate.

-ktkenshinx-

[Julian23]

I am not lying to judges at all. I was debating on what to do during my opponent's upkeep; tap lands so he can't use them in his main phase, or destroy lands for the same effect.

No, you are lying. You are not pondering over how to tap/destroy lands. You are trying to make your opponent forget about his triggers.


I am merely asking the judge a question about how passing priority and trigger stacking works in a complicated situation. This is a rules clarification, not a lie or a bluff.

How can pretending not to know something you do actually know not be a bluff?

[cdr]

If a judge asked you directly why you did that, telling him a "bulletproof story" is lying to him. If he figures out you're lying, you're headed for Cheating - Fraud. You can admit you were trying to misdirect your opponent - that's not illegal. If you really don't want your opponent to know you misdirected him (why?), you could take the judge aside and answer.

Calling a judge when you don't have a legitimate question is wasting the judge's time. Attempting to misdirect your opponent by using a judge is involving a judge in a bluff.

[cjva]

reading ktkenshinx post one thing spring to mind.

Whenever your opponent have a strange behavior, stop for a moment and try to figure out why. in 9 times out of 10 you'll come to the conclusion that you are probably winning and he need to do something drastic in order to win.

The mindgame that have made me lose most games are the nice guys mind game.

A nice guy that could just as likely been your buddy. You chat about everything and anything and I lose focus on my game. Thats a good mind game that will make you friends after the game. Win - Win.

[Grollub]

The mindgame that have made me lose most games are the nice guys mind game.

A nice guy that could just as likely been your buddy. You chat about everything and anything and I lose focus on my game. Thats a good mind game that will make you friends after the game. Win - Win.

Quoted for truth. I've lost once to a bad guy mind game - and learned my leason-, but multiple times to the nice guy (which probably often times isn't a mindgame but rather just how he is, heh - or at least that's what I tell myself). :-)

[cjva]

Well, as far as my experience goes all the rely good players I'v faced or seen in action have been "nice guys" in one form or the other. So I guess there's some truth in it.

[paK0]

Quoted for truth. I've lost once to a bad guy mind game - and learned my leason-, but multiple times to the nice guy (which probably often times isn't a mindgame but rather just how he is, heh - or at least that's what I tell myself). :-)


Yeah, its good if you have that experience earlie. I used to fall for that stuff once, never again, still I'm kinda thankful it happened.

Forgetting triggers is kind of a newbie problem. When you get better you have to spend less time thinking about triggers, you just remember them without even trying. I think this has something to do that the more you play the more you realize there is something going on in the upkeep. When I was playing casually the Upkeep was practically nonexistent and even after I got into competetive play it was more of a nuisance than an actual phase. Once you leave that mindset behind you do not skip the triggers but just pause before them, when your opponent says go you just pay for your stuff.

And srsly, if your opponent just spent 20 secs to figure out what to do anyone with a brain will at least wonder what he was trying to accomplish.

[Wyrath the Great]

When I read pathetic stuff like this, I'm suddenly glad I play exclusively on MTGO.

Nerds...

[wcm8]

All these mind tricks seem ridiculous. If you want to psych your opponent out, act and play professionally. For example, shuffle your deck like this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-kcRIe39_M&feature=related

If I was playing against someone like that, I'd be more concerned with overanalyzing my own opening hand, and possibly risking more mulligans. There's no trickery involved, it's just somewhat intimidating.

Another perfectly reasonable thing you can do is ask about the game state, eg: number of cards in hand. It's useful to know regardless, but it can also make your opponent think you have a play based around that. Or occasionally catch someone from cheating/accidentally drawing too much and get a game win.

The lowest I'd go is to conspicuously fiddle with a land, e.g.: an untapped plains, whether or not I'm holding an StP or not. Blue players used to do this with two islands back in the day when Counterspell was still played, but now most decks are packing Daze/FoW -- and so just having some sort of island in play is enough to make your opponents reconsider their t1/2 plays and possibly lose tempo since you're not holding a daze.

[dahcmai]

Yeah, but I can actually play combo elves with paper. lol


Anyway, emldin might remember this one from GP Chicago as I sat next to him for a round and he noticed it. I was playing with the typical pink sleeves and had a goblin token beside my box in a small stack of separatly sleeved tokens when I sat down. My opponent checked his hand and glanced at the tokens, then took a mull, then kept looking at them. The tokens were only a small stack I keep with me for all decks, they have much more than just goblins in it. I dropped a island/chrome mox first turn and got a nice shocked look as counterbalance went out. He was playing storm. I kind of felt bad as I know he tossed a good hand for control and went for speed.


Mind tricks might seem dumb, but I played with Pat Chapin enough to know it's half the game. He does it every single match and will feel you out to get any and every single amount of advantage out of it fairly that he can. It's almost annoying to try and play people like that for fun.


I had a friend of mine play a good one on me. I was playing storm and as he watched me mystical up a ritual and he counted my mana and started to realize I had the nuts and was going for it, he dropped a Force of Will from his hand and quickly scooped it back up remarking "you didn't see that" and chuckled. Of course, I rethink my position and realize I will need one more thoughtseize to punch through a force and something else if he has it. So I end up giving him one more turn and then I go for it after I get the one more land drop I need to punch through two counters. I hit him with the first thoughtseize and notice his hand has only the 1 force and no blue card. Nice... Good stall there.

[xTrainx]

I'm definitely going to end up toying around with the Goblin/Zombie token lying around by my deckbox; perhaps even switching them up.

A mind game that I like to use is the nice guy approach.
I walk in, shake the guys hand, tell him my name, ask him how the tournaments going for him(even though I know it'll be around the same as me). We roll the dice, and I tend to make a joke about the roll. I shuffle for a little bit, and chat a little bit more, being very careful not to show any of my cards, and ask pretty casually; so what're you playing for me today? About half the the people I ask end up telling me what deck their using. If they say something like "How 'bout you find out?", I generally go: "So something blue, right?" At that point, it becomes reading facial signs. I play Storm Combo a lot, so the information can help a lot of the time, but I think the trickiest part is trying to decide if they're lying or not. Some people you can tell if they're nice guys, others you have to wonder about - these you keep a standard hand against.

So all in all, it can help me to find out about 80% of people's decks(at a semi-competitive level) - it would probably decrease in help as the competition went up.

[Damoxx]

I always use my playmat with islands and the blue mana symbol on it when I play Belcher. Seems to help from time to time.

[Gocho]

If you have 'extra cards' with your deck/board in a box, those cards are considered to be part of your sideboard. If they're not with your deck but you imply they're part of your sideboard, they're considered to be part of your sideboard. Deck/Decklist Mismatch = Game Loss.

I hope the Arbor was actually in your deck.


Right, the only extra 'cards' you can have are tokens. But some tokens would do similar trick.

[HAVE HEART]

Right, the only extra 'cards' you can have are tokens. But some tokens would do similar trick.

I have heard that cards in the deck box that cannot be cast/used by the person's deck are actually accepted. For example, if I am playing an Extended PTQ, traded a person for a Force of Will at the tournament, and put it into my Extended deck box. I have also asked a judge if I could keep cards (e.g. Tarmogoyf) in my deck box which contained a deck without a way to cast/use them, and he said it would be okay.

[Ozymandias]

Yesterday, I had a Sphinx of the Steel Wind deck box and some elephant tokens to go with my AnT deck. I didn't run that bluff, but I did fetch t1 Trop and cast Ponder or Top a few times.

[Gocho]

My brother get a Game Loss some months ago because he has a single Shatterskull Giant in a Green sleeve near his sideboard at a 50+ players tournament. He was playing Merfolks with Blue Sleeves.

[cdr]

I have heard that cards in the deck box that cannot be cast/used by the person's deck are actually accepted. For example, if I am playing an Extended PTQ, traded a person for a Force of Will at the tournament, and put it into my Extended deck box. I have also asked a judge if I could keep cards (e.g. Tarmogoyf) in my deck box which contained a deck without a way to cast/use them, and he said it would be okay.

It's generally a bad idea to keep random cards with your deck even if it doesn't earn you a penalty, and an even worse idea to try to game your opponent with them. If you can avoid it, you should avoid it.

A game loss for a Shatterskull Giant seems unlikely, though.

IPG 2.2:
Additionally, if there are extra cards stored with the sideboard that could conceivably be played in the player’s deck, they will be considered a part of the sideboard.

[mchainmail]

The only "mind trick" I ever use is playing 43 Lands; with tabernacle out, instructing players I have actions in their "Draw Step" Occasionally, people will miss the Tabernacle trigger.

(The best part is this is entirely fair if I have a possible draw-step action like Port.)

[Julian23]

(The best part is this is entirely fair if I have a possible draw-step action like Port.)

It seems we are followers of different schools of "fairness".

[Forbiddian]

I like the attitude that people have: There's some invisible line, independent of the rules, that you can't cross for some reason.

Helps get me wins.


I'm a fairly aggressive bluffer.

I've definitely dropped Force of Will on the table, or Daze (particularly when I'm pitching the Daze to the Force of Will). It usually gets people to slow down, especially if you practice dropping cards on the table and can kinda do it at will. Also, when I don't have Force of Will, I shuffle my hand like I do have a Force (video tape yourself shuffling your hand --> combo players are looking for the pattern of pairing two cards together and looking at them). It's also instinctive to look down at your hand instantly if you DO have countermagic, but then if you're bluffing Countermagia (like the other guy goes for second Dark Ritual and you're like: Wait! --> the combo player is looking to see where you're looking) most people don't look at their hands during a bluff but instinctively look at their hands if they actually have the goods. So try to do the reverse.

When I have plenty of land and I rip a land off the top, I put it straight into play (without touching my hand, or just barely touching my hand). People think this means you're mana screwed.

Better players know that good players try to hide this. When good players are mana screwed, they shuffle their hand after their draw so that you can't see if they just ripped the land. If your opponent only has a play like land-pass (particularly if it's an awkward land), you can usually infer that they're mana screwed. That means it's good form to shuffle your hand after your turn 2 draw regardless of the situation.



I've definitely made technical mistakes but then bluffed my way back into matches. I don't think I've pulled the ridiculous shit like double undermine mana stopping Urza's Rage (gfg bluff), but I've definitely gotten people to wait on Stifle mana/use their tutor power to get Ponders when I'm completely mana flooded and a Tarmogoyf would have run me down.

On the other side, reading your opponent is very important. If your opponent seems too good, you need to shut down your reads and try to win with good technical play, but you can also get a very big advantage by reading an inexperienced player who broadcasts information. Like a player who slumps when you Swords his guy probably doesn't have two more Tarmogoyfs in his hand and you can definitely take advantage of that.

So there's a real give and take between bluffing/making your bluffs credible and reading your opponent/falling for a bluff, but if you're not bluffing or reading, you're not maximizing your game.

[Wyrath the Great]

I like the attitude that people have: There's some invisible line, independent of the rules, that you can't cross for some reason.

Helps get me wins.


I'm a fairly aggressive bluffer.

I've definitely dropped Force of Will on the table, or Daze (particularly when I'm pitching the Daze to the Force of Will). It usually gets people to slow down, especially if you practice dropping cards on the table and can kinda do it at will. Also, when I don't have Force of Will, I shuffle my hand like I do have a Force (video tape yourself shuffling your hand --> combo players are looking for the pattern of pairing two cards together and looking at them). It's also instinctive to look down at your hand instantly if you DO have countermagic, but then if you're bluffing Countermagia (like the other guy goes for second Dark Ritual and you're like: Wait! --> the combo player is looking to see where you're looking) most people don't look at their hands during a bluff but instinctively look at their hands if they actually have the goods. So try to do the reverse.

When I have plenty of land and I rip a land off the top, I put it straight into play (without touching my hand, or just barely touching my hand). People think this means you're mana screwed.

Better players know that good players try to hide this. When good players are mana screwed, they shuffle their hand after their draw so that you can't see if they just ripped the land. If your opponent only has a play like land-pass (particularly if it's an awkward land), you can usually infer that they're mana screwed. That means it's good form to shuffle your hand after your turn 2 draw regardless of the situation.



I've definitely made technical mistakes but then bluffed my way back into matches. I don't think I've pulled the ridiculous shit like double undermine mana stopping Urza's Rage (gfg bluff), but I've definitely gotten people to wait on Stifle mana/use their tutor power to get Ponders when I'm completely mana flooded and a Tarmogoyf would have run me down.

On the other side, reading your opponent is very important. If your opponent seems too good, you need to shut down your reads and try to win with good technical play, but you can also get a very big advantage by reading an inexperienced player who broadcasts information. Like a player who slumps when you Swords his guy probably doesn't have two more Tarmogoyfs in his hand and you can definitely take advantage of that.

So there's a real give and take between bluffing/making your bluffs credible and reading your opponent/falling for a bluff, but if you're not bluffing or reading, you're not maximizing your game.

Anyone have that ASCII art thingy with the guy facepalming?

[Jon Stewart]

I won't go into the morality of this. But If you want to force mulligans and misplays, the best strategy is to " drop" cards that convince your opponent that you are playing a first turn win combo like an ad nauseum or Empty the warrens. You could even put 15 cards beside you (your sideboard) and have the face up show an Empty the Warrens. This requires you devoting a sideboard slot to empty the warrens though so it's probably not worth it.

But "smart" opponents will mulligan any hand without FoW especially if you are playing first.

[Forbiddian]

But "smart" opponents will mulligan any hand without FoW especially if you are playing first.

They also might have scouted you already.

Although it's probably worth a sideboard slot to get one opponent to mulligan to 6, I dunno if it's a bluff one could consistently pull off. Actually having the card in you sideboard grants it a lot of credibility, but unlike these other bluffs it could potentially end up costing you significantly.

[dahcmai]

There is a downside to doing this just so you know. Occasionally, you will run into someone like myself that gets annoyed with the overly competitive personalities. If a person decides to try and catch me on every step for some sort of gain, I decide to turn the tables hard. I will rules lawyer worse than anyone ever saw. I will catch every step, every target, and force you to call your steps and pass priority on every single thing. I have done it to a few people at Grand Prix that thought they were smart and they ended up getting so flabbergasted they made mistakes and I wouldn't allow any "go back" phases at all and had no qualms about calling a judge for anything. They paid for the irritant in kind. I made their game miserable. I had judges watch me because of it. I knew I was being an ass and would even explain why later to them. I usually got a laugh out of it.

I learned from someone who made a point of catching me on each and every flaw I made by rolling a dice over for each mistake. We played hardcore rules lawyer games to see how much we could get on the other one. It didn't matter who won, we played to catch more mistakes than the other.

You don't ever want to run into someone that played like that. I watched that same friend of mine call a person for casting Time Spiral and not targeting the lands he was to untap. Don't beleive it, look it up, it's a pro tour finish. People will get annoyed after a while if you trick them with dirty stunts. Good plays are one thing, being an ass is another.

Always something to think about. ;)

[Vacrix]

If you have 'extra cards' with your deck/board in a box, those cards are considered to be part of your sideboard. If they're not with your deck but you imply they're part of your sideboard, they're considered to be part of your sideboard. Deck/Decklist Mismatch = Game Loss.

I hope the Arbor was actually in your deck.
The Arbor was. The cards I was referring to were just lumped with a bunch of other shit I brought to the table, including my bag, laptop, etc. I just kinda left it where it could be seen. Is that legal?


For those interested, I tried these tactics at the Knightware tournament. One time, I dropped Arbor on the board. He said, "yeah I love that guy. Wouldn't it be awesome if they printed a cycle of those?" To which I responded with "it would be pretty sick. its already so strong with natural order into progenitus since you can fetch arbor with Fetchlands." He thought I was playing NO bant. Good deal.
Another guy, I tried the same thing except I was talking to my team mate (who sat next to me) about how I was going to win the game with Arbor again, and flashed it to him. Unfortunately my opponent kept a hand that was good against both NO and SI --> Teeg for the win.. Pretty lame.
The last game, I played LED pass, and my opponent went off with Iona. I folded, but alluded to playing dredge. He didn't see anything else I played that turn so he sided in his grave hate.

Just something to think about.

EDIT:

There is a downside to doing this just so you know. Occasionally, you will run into someone like myself that gets annoyed with the overly competitive personalities. If a person decides to try and catch me on every step for some sort of gain, I decide to turn the tables hard. I will rules lawyer worse than anyone ever saw. I will catch every step, every target, and force you to call your steps and pass priority on every single thing. I have done it to a few people at Grand Prix that thought they were smart and they ended up getting so flabbergasted they made mistakes and I wouldn't allow any "go back" phases at all and had no qualms about calling a judge for anything. They paid for the irritant in kind. I made their game miserable. I had judges watch me because of it. I knew I was being an ass and would even explain why later to them. I usually got a laugh out of it.

I learned from someone who made a point of catching me on each and every flaw I made by rolling a dice over for each mistake. We played hardcore rules lawyer games to see how much we could get on the other one. It didn't matter who won, we played to catch more mistakes than the other.

You don't ever want to run into someone that played like that. I watched that same friend of mine call a person for casting Time Spiral and not targeting the lands he was to untap. Don't beleive it, look it up, it's a pro tour finish. People will get annoyed after a while if you trick them with dirty stunts. Good plays are one thing, being an ass is another.

Always something to think about. ;)
I've always had a problem with people who get pissed at you for calling the rules the way they are. Like people at a tournament who say 'friendly mull'. Really? Lol you don't want to do that against me I'm playing combo... Some dude asked me that only he called it 'gentlemen's mull'. How clever of him.
I don't think you are being an ass by making people end each phase and such. Sure its not the most fun way to play magic but 'take backs' in chess is just as devastating as in magic; the point of the game is not to see who draws the better cards but to see who plays better. The dude asking you if he can put his Jotun Grunt back into play because he forgot to pay the upkeep deserves to lose.

[cdr]

The cards I was referring to were just lumped with a bunch of other shit I brought to the table, including my bag, laptop, etc. I just kinda left it where it could be seen. Is that legal?

Possibly. Probably the closer you get to possibly getting an advantage with it the closer you get to doing something illegal, so not the best idea.

[Vacrix]

Thanks. What about tokens? Am I allowed to keep Zombie tokens near my dice, lifetotal chart, etc?

[frogboy]

my default answer whenever I'm obviously in the tank and my opponent asks me some irrelevant question is to tell them how adorable they are and bash them

[frogboy]

Thanks. What about tokens? Am I allowed to keep Zombie tokens near my dice, lifetotal chart, etc?

are you a ringer? a friend of mine ran this once with Goblin tokens. He has a GP top eight. I didn't know what he was playing when I saw the tokens. I knew it wasn't aggressive and mulliganned accordingly. Nice Martyr of Sands, idiot.

[Vacrix]

are you a ringer? a friend of mine ran this once with Goblin tokens. He has a GP top eight. I didn't know what he was playing when I saw the tokens. I knew it wasn't aggressive and mulliganned accordingly. Nice Martyr of Sands, idiot.
What's a ringer?

[cdr]

Thanks. What about tokens? Am I allowed to keep Zombie tokens near my dice, lifetotal chart, etc?

Tokens aren't cards, so knock yourself out.

[Rico Suave]

What's a ringer?

A ringer is an extremely talented person surrounded by people who aren't nearly as good. Another term for ringer is a shark, which comes from playing pool where good players are considered shark amongst fish.

But we're not talking about good players, we're talking about really good players. The kind of players who are on levels you don't even comprehend.

The people who aren't nearly as good "think" they're good, pull of their cute guerilla tactics, and don't realize the ringer is about 10 steps ahead of them. In other words, you may think you're tricking your opponent but you're only giving them valuable information.

Of course, taking advantage of these people in a game of Magic isn't nearly as satisfying as taking advantage of them in pool or poker, where large amounts of money are bet on games. But the analogy still applies. The basic premise is that most people think they're a lot better than they really are, which mostly stems from their inability to fully grasp the entirety of the game and all of its complexity.

[Vacrix]

No I doubt I'm that good. I consider myself a pretty good storm pilot though.

[Jak]

I think people should focus more on the game than cheap and stupid little tricks to try and help themselves win. Stuff like laying out tokens, having a misleading playmat/deckbox, etc will not work against players that actually know what they are doing. You are better off focusing on the match and leave the terrible mind tricks for someone else.

Now, I am not saying all mind tricks are bad, since this is a competitive game and I will do a lot of things to get a slight edge but don't waste your time with stupid crap.

[Raptor]

I was known for playing ichorid in my area, and one day I built canadian ******** and brought it to a tournament. I had some Zombie tokens out to bluff opponents that I knew, and who are friends. They had a good laugh when I did turn 1 fetchlands and they realised I wasn't playing ichorid.

I don't usually mindtrick people, I just play the game for fun but do not show emotions of what I am drawing. I always shuffle my hand because I don't want to show that I'm manascrewed or flooded. I also shuffle it because if my opponent saw my hands I don't want to put a card into play that was not the at the same place in my hand, revealing that I've two of them.

I've won a game recently because I was playing merfolk with vial at 2 and at 3 and my opponent had a grim lavamancer and lots of creatures he was at 5 and I had a Lord of Atlantis and mutavault. I had sovereign in hand, activated vial at 2, in response, he lavamancer my LOA, I activate my vial at 3, and put sovereign into play. I topdeck a lord put it into play, activated the sovereign and my mutavault got unblockable and I swang for the win.

Of course when people ask me if I have the daze or the force, "I always have it"

[Roman Candle]

This one time I convinced my opponent that the droids I was carrying were not the droids he was looking for. Then I beat him down with Tarmogoyf.

[Forbiddian]

You don't ever want to run into someone that played like that. I watched that same friend of mine call a person for casting Time Spiral and not targeting the lands he was to untap. Don't beleive it, look it up, it's a pro tour finish. People will get annoyed after a while if you trick them with dirty stunts. Good plays are one thing, being an ass is another.



I don't mind you being a rules Nazi, but actually know the rules. Time Spiral doesn't target the lands. Your silly play is not a trick, it's just you not knowing the mechanics of the game. It's on the same level of a player swinging with creatures and then you saying, "You didn't declare that you're attacking me! You miss your attack step!"

And anyway, I don't believe you, and I didn't bother to try to look it up because no judge would possibly rule that Time Spiral has a hidden target ability that's not there. Your other stuff is just as stupid. Passing Priority is well-handled by the rules. So is most everything else that you said, and all of it would fall under Slow Play, if not actually Cheating.

So in short: Rules Nazi away, but please learn the rules before you try.

You'll find that it's actually prety hard to be a "rules Nazi."

[memnarch]

In my experience most magic players don't bluff much at all with the exception of having counter magic. Like you draw a land and already have enough so keep it in your hand to bluff counter magic. I definitely agree with Forbiddian though that noticing when your opponent looks at his or her hand can be a big tell. So bluffing can be beneficial, more so with blue I think. But ultimately you need to be paying attention to your plays because even pro players make mistakes most every game. Its not like poker where the strategy IS bluffing because Magic is just so complicated strategically and logistically that bluffing is a smaller factor. Things like knowing the players, what they play and the meta game for your sideboard is probably going to be a bigger factor. Also shuffling your sideboard into your deck and then removing 15 is a good strategy. But keeping random cards close to your side? I think that's a bad idea that's a little close to cheating and won't help you much either.

[Vacrix]

A ringer is an extremely talented person surrounded by people who aren't nearly as good. Another term for ringer is a shark, which comes from playing pool where good players are considered shark amongst fish.

But we're not talking about good players, we're talking about really good players. The kind of players who are on levels you don't even comprehend.

The people who aren't nearly as good "think" they're good, pull of their cute guerilla tactics, and don't realize the ringer is about 10 steps ahead of them. In other words, you may think you're tricking your opponent but you're only giving them valuable information.

Of course, taking advantage of these people in a game of Magic isn't nearly as satisfying as taking advantage of them in pool or poker, where large amounts of money are bet on games. But the analogy still applies. The basic premise is that most people think they're a lot better than they really are, which mostly stems from their inability to fully grasp the entirety of the game and all of its complexity.
In general I think that the mind tricks work on people who are looking for information ahead of time. Noobs are usually oblivious to what the opponent is playing anyway. I think that most experienced players try to put the opponent on a deck so they know how to play against them. I'd just rather the opponent play less conservatively. For example, if my opponent thinks I'm NOT playing combo, they might not leave mana open for Spell Pierce (or something) on the first turn and instead cast a vial. Tactics like these are unlikely to work on the virtuoso's you speak of. I still think its a tactic worth pursuing. Just like small talk within the first few turns of the game could lead the opponent to be completely off with their cabal therapy. Unlike in poker, its rarely the mechanism by which you win.

[ktkenshinx]

I think people should focus more on the game than cheap and stupid little tricks to try and help themselves win. Stuff like laying out tokens, having a misleading playmat/deckbox, etc will not work against players that actually know what they are doing. You are better off focusing on the match and leave the terrible mind tricks for someone else.

Now, I am not saying all mind tricks are bad, since this is a competitive game and I will do a lot of things to get a slight edge but don't waste your time with stupid crap.

This is somewhat misleading advice. If mind tricks aren't bad and give a slight edge, then why should players not waste their "time with stupid crap"? I understand the premise behind your post: smart players don't care about mind tricks, so why bother with them when they won't work. But you can't exactly say that and then add that they can "give a slight edge." In competitive Magic, as in all competitive things, "slight edges" are always good, provided they are legal. If they are not legal, then they are definitely not worth it.

The most interesting arguments are not the moralizing ones (and this is NOT to accuse Jak of making one; indeed, I don't think he does). Magic Moralists appeal to some higher, Kantian "categorical imperative" of game etiquette. None of us really know what that higher moral principle is, and how it works in Magic. Is Magic about being a nice guy? If yes, would you let your opponent take back a catastrophic play error? If yes again, would you let them do it in the semifinals? Or the finals? I bet a lot of Magic Moralists have a rather inconsistent moral calculus, and that is seen in this thread.

Then there are the effectiveness arguments. These are far more persuasive and currently more worthy of discussion. The way I see it, there are two such arguments as they apply to Guerilla Tactics.

1) If your opponent is bad/noob enough to fall for mind tricks, then why bother using them anyway?
1a) If you needed the mind tricks to beat a bad player, then you yourself are probably a bad player and should work on improving gameplay.
1b) If you don't need the mind tricks to beat a bad player, then why waste time with them?

2) If your opponent is good/pro enough to not be fooled by mind tricks, then why bother using them?
2a) It's better to work on your gameplay and deck piloting abilities instead of your mindtrick ones. Working on one helps you win. The other doesn't do shit.

I totally agree with the 1(a/b) sets of arguments. If your opponent is bad and you need mind tricks to win, then you really should be working on gameplay, not on being clever with the rules.

The 2(a) sets of arguments, however, are less persuasive. They operate on a fundamental assumption: good players are immune to mind tricks. While that might be a matter of ego and pride that all good players would probably attest to, but is it actually true? I do not think so.

The Profane Command Bluff[
Remember Patrick Chapins Profane Command bluff? For those of you not familiar, Chapin had a bunch of creatures in play and was in trouble. He needed to win immediately or he would probably lose on the following turn. So he slapped down an 8 mana Profane Command stating "Profane Command. You lose 6 life and all my legal targets gain fear." He then swung with everything. His opponent could not figure out a way to block and live, so he declared what blockers he could and lost the game.

The thing was, Chapin had a Chameleon Colossus in play with protection from black. His opponent assumed that the Colossus was a legal target for the Command when in reality it was not. Chapin made no rules flub and jedi mind tricked his way to a win.

Two points on this. First, Chapin is a damn good player, and his opponent was probably pretty good himself. The mind trick definitely worked here; what is to differentiate this trick from any other guerilla tactic mentioned in this thread?
Second, Chapin violated no rules. He got a ton of flak for it on the forums from the Magic Moralists, but he did nothing really wrong. This strikes me as an excellent example of a good mind trick, properly executed at a proper time.

What are your thoughts on the breakdown of arguments (1 and 2)? What are your thoughts about the differences between the morality-based arguments and the effectiveness-based arguments?

-ktkenshinx-

[Nelis]

The Profane Command Bluff[
Remember Patrick Chapins Profane Command bluff? For those of you not familiar, Chapin had a bunch of creatures in play and was in trouble. He needed to win immediately or he would probably lose on the following turn. So he slapped down an 8 mana Profane Command stating "Profane Command. You lose 6 life and all my legal targets gain fear." He then swung with everything. His opponent could not figure out a way to block and live, so he declared what blockers he could and lost the game.

The thing was, Chapin had a Chameleon Colossus in play with protection from black. His opponent assumed that the Colossus was a legal target for the Command when in reality it was not. Chapin made no rules flub and jedi mind tricked his way to a win.

Two points on this. First, Chapin is a damn good player, and his opponent was probably pretty good himself. The mind trick definitely worked here; what is to differentiate this trick from any other guerilla tactic mentioned in this thread?
Second, Chapin violated no rules. He got a ton of flak for it on the forums from the Magic Moralists, but he did nothing really wrong. This strikes me as an excellent example of a good mind trick, properly executed at a proper time.

What are your thoughts on the breakdown of arguments (1 and 2)? What are your thoughts about the differences between the morality-based arguments and the effectiveness-based arguments?



Does he not have to tell which creatures he wants to target? Seems like cheating to me but I'm no rules expert.

[ktkenshinx]

Does he not have to tell which creatures he wants to target? Seems like cheating to me but I'm no rules expert.

Technically speaking, Chapin would have to have said the following for the play to be 100% within the rules:

"I cast Profane Command with an X value of 6. Of the two choices, I choose that 'Target player loses X life' and 'X target creatures gain fear until end of turn'. I announce you as the target of the life loss. I announce Cloudthresher, Wilt-Leaf Sage, and Wilt-Leaf Sage as my targets to gain fear. I pass priority."

Imagine if every play worked out like that. Magic would be at a grinding halt, and judges would be flying around the room to get people to be less obnoxious and hurry up. Like any player in that situation, Chapin said the far easier, and far more deceptive, "Profane command. You lose 6 life and all my legal targets gain fear."

He never specified how many creatures gained fear. He never told his opponent that Colossus had fear. Indeed, by saying "legal targets", he was effectively saying that Colossus did not have fear, as anyone could see it was a highly illegal target. If his opponent had asked for clarification, Chapin would certainly have explained what had fear and what did not. Chapin did not say "I give all my creatures fear," or "All my creatures gain fear"; that would have been illegal and would have resulted in a loss.

Was it tricky? Yes. Was it cheating? No.

-ktkenshinx-

[DownSyndromeKarl]

highly illegal target

as oppose to moderately illegal, lol

I see nothing wrong with what Chapin did. Its like the other thread where someone mentioned calling Noble Hierarch as a target for Pithing Needle. If Chapin's opponent were halfway awake, they should have asked specifically what's being targeted, at which point Chapin would have to tell him. But they werent aware of the game state and thats on them.

[Vacrix]

Technically speaking, Chapin would have to have said the following for the play to be 100% within the rules:

"I cast Profane Command with an X value of 6. Of the two choices, I choose that 'Target player loses X life' and 'X target creatures gain fear until end of turn'. I announce you as the target of the life loss. I announce Cloudthresher, Wilt-Leaf Sage, and Wilt-Leaf Sage as my targets to gain fear. I pass priority."

Imagine if every play worked out like that. Magic would be at a grinding halt, and judges would be flying around the room to get people to be less obnoxious and hurry up. Like any player in that situation, Chapin said the far easier, and far more deceptive, "Profane command. You lose 6 life and all my legal targets gain fear."

He never specified how many creatures gained fear. He never told his opponent that Colossus had fear. Indeed, by saying "legal targets", he was effectively saying that Colossus did not have fear, as anyone could see it was a highly illegal target. If his opponent had asked for clarification, Chapin would certainly have explained what had fear and what did not. Chapin did not say "I give all my creatures fear," or "All my creatures gain fear"; that would have been illegal and would have resulted in a loss.

Was it tricky? Yes. Was it cheating? No.

-ktkenshinx-
Thats a pretty good idea. I guess putting a lot of pressure on a player all at once can win you the game. Sometimes while playing combo against a clearly uncomfortable opponent, I lay down my hand and ask them if they really want me to play it out. I've had an opponent fold once with a hand that was unclear whether or not I would have won. Sometimes people concede before you have completed the combo too when you really don't have it. One time I played out Belcher and my opponent conceded even though I couldn't activate it. These are just as good of tactics as tricking your opponent into mulliganing. I'll definitely be using this technique.

[(nameless one)]

Thats a pretty good idea. I guess putting a lot of pressure on a player all at once can win you the game. Sometimes while playing combo against a clearly uncomfortable opponent, I lay down my hand and ask them if they really want me to play it out. I've had an opponent fold once with a hand that was unclear whether or not I would have won. Sometimes people concede before you have completed the combo too when you really don't have it. One time I played out Belcher and my opponent conceded even though I couldn't activate it. These are just as good of tactics as tricking your opponent into mulliganing. I'll definitely be using this technique.

This. Sometime, if you play control, you can lock down a player and they will just concede even if you do not have a win condition yet. Sometimes, when I play a bad matchup, especially with asshole players, I would actually side out my win conditions for my Quinn deck in hopes of at least bring in a tie-breaker or winning from a locked game.


On the other hand, I myself do not concede unless my life is at 0 or an actual card actually tells me I have lost the game.

Back on the actual Guerilla Tactics, I myself have one. I only use one color of sleeve for all my cards. This way, if I am playing on the local store, the other players that I always play against with won't be able to tell what I am playing on game 1. I realized this when players from that local store will have a specific sleeve for a specific deck.

Also, I never playtest a deck right before the tournament. I tell everyone that its bad luck but really, I don't want the other players to know what I will be playing for that current tournament. At the same time, I would actually try to scope on what the other players are playing.

Yes, I admit that I am not a good magic player.

[Nelis]

as oppose to moderately illegal, lol

I see nothing wrong with what Chapin did. Its like the other thread where someone mentioned calling Noble Hierarch as a target for Pithing Needle. If Chapin's opponent were halfway awake, they should have asked specifically what's being targeted, at which point Chapin would have to tell him. But they werent aware of the game state and thats on them.

I dont mean to argue about the legitimicy of the Chapin play but this is not exactly the same. Because Pithing Needle targets the creature not its (mana) ability. I am allowed to say (target) Noble Hierarch with Pithing Needle but I wouldn't be allowed to say (target) Chameleon Colossus with Profane Command.

[Vacrix]

This. Sometime, if you play control, you can lock down a player and they will just concede even if you do not have a win condition yet. Sometimes, when I play a bad matchup, especially with asshole players, I would actually side out my win conditions for my Quinn deck in hopes of at least bring in a tie-breaker or winning from a locked game.


On the other hand, I myself do not concede unless my life is at 0 or an actual card actually tells me I have lost the game.

Back on the actual Guerilla Tactics, I myself have one. I only use one color of sleeve for all my cards. This way, if I am playing on the local store, the other players that I always play against with won't be able to tell what I am playing on game 1. I realized this when players from that local store will have a specific sleeve for a specific deck.

Also, I never playtest a deck right before the tournament. I tell everyone that its bad luck but really, I don't want the other players to know what I will be playing for that current tournament. At the same time, I would actually try to scope on what the other players are playing.

Yes, I admit that I am not a good magic player.
Nice. My friend actually played a deck in which he gains infinite life (Life.dec w/ Clerics)... without a win condition so that he could consistently get the life combo really quickly. Often his opponent would concede. Sometimes they would play it out though, in which lots of lols ensued.

[DownSyndromeKarl]

I dont mean to argue about the legitimicy of the Chapin play but this is not exactly the same. Because Pithing Needle targets the creature not its (mana) ability. I am allowed to say (target) Noble Hierarch with Pithing Needle but I wouldn't be allowed to say (target) Chameleon Colossus with Profane Command.

right, but Chapin never said he was targeting the Colossus. In Chapin's case, it meant "*not* targeting the Colossus" and the other example it meant "Targeting Hierarch with no effect". What makes them the same is the opponent failed to realize what the statement meant.

[Nightmare]

Guerilla Tactics used to be a staple in burn decks, but it's not considered a good card anymore. Maybe in the sideboard to side vs. discard?

[edgewalker]

Combo: Guerilla Tactics + Chain of Smog+ Mind Fuck

[Jak]

This is somewhat misleading advice. If mind tricks aren't bad and give a slight edge, then why should players not waste their "time with stupid crap"? I understand the premise behind your post: smart players don't care about mind tricks, so why bother with them when they won't work. But you can't exactly say that and then add that they can "give a slight edge." In competitive Magic, as in all competitive things, "slight edges" are always good, provided they are legal. If they are not legal, then they are definitely not worth it.

The most interesting arguments are not the moralizing ones (and this is NOT to accuse Jak of making one; indeed, I don't think he does). Magic Moralists appeal to some higher, Kantian "categorical imperative" of game etiquette. None of us really know what that higher moral principle is, and how it works in Magic. Is Magic about being a nice guy? If yes, would you let your opponent take back a catastrophic play error? If yes again, would you let them do it in the semifinals? Or the finals? I bet a lot of Magic Moralists have a rather inconsistent moral calculus, and that is seen in this thread.

Then there are the effectiveness arguments. These are far more persuasive and currently more worthy of discussion. The way I see it, there are two such arguments as they apply to Guerilla Tactics.

1) If your opponent is bad/noob enough to fall for mind tricks, then why bother using them anyway?
1a) If you needed the mind tricks to beat a bad player, then you yourself are probably a bad player and should work on improving gameplay.
1b) If you don't need the mind tricks to beat a bad player, then why waste time with them?

2) If your opponent is good/pro enough to not be fooled by mind tricks, then why bother using them?
2a) It's better to work on your gameplay and deck piloting abilities instead of your mindtrick ones. Working on one helps you win. The other doesn't do shit.

I totally agree with the 1(a/b) sets of arguments. If your opponent is bad and you need mind tricks to win, then you really should be working on gameplay, not on being clever with the rules.

The 2(a) sets of arguments, however, are less persuasive. They operate on a fundamental assumption: good players are immune to mind tricks. While that might be a matter of ego and pride that all good players would probably attest to, but is it actually true? I do not think so.



Basically, I am saying to stop worrying about how to "mind trick" your opponent before the game even starts. You're better off scouting, thinking about the match and what to do, than try to make him think you are playing Merfolk instead of Landstill. I think you would get more of an edge putting your mind and effort into that than trying to drop cards (even though this is decent) or making sure he sees your tokens/playmat/deckbox.

To give an answer to the second part; I am all for cutthroat games of Magic when I pay to enter a tournament. I think if you pay up money, you should be able to do anything within the rules to win. This does offend people but those people should realize that a lot of people get fun out of winning. Not having a good time when you get mind tricked? Don't fall for them.

[DownSyndromeKarl]

Guerilla Tactics used to be a staple in burn decks, but it's not considered a good card anymore. Maybe in the sideboard to side vs. discard?

you could always resort to gorilla tactics and beat your chest to distract them while you defecate on the table.

[Star|Scream]

you could always resort to gorilla tactics and beat your chest to distract them while you defecate on the table.

this

[jrsthethird]

I dont mean to argue about the legitimicy of the Chapin play but this is not exactly the same. Because Pithing Needle targets the creature not its (mana) ability. I am allowed to say (target) Noble Hierarch with Pithing Needle but I wouldn't be allowed to say (target) Chameleon Colossus with Profane Command.

Pithing Needle doesn't target. Stop saying that it does.

[Forbiddian]

Then there are the effectiveness arguments. These are far more persuasive and currently more worthy of discussion. The way I see it, there are two such arguments as they apply to Guerilla Tactics.

1) If your opponent is bad/noob enough to fall for mind tricks, then why bother using them anyway?
1a) If you needed the mind tricks to beat a bad player, then you yourself are probably a bad player and should work on improving gameplay.
1b) If you don't need the mind tricks to beat a bad player, then why waste time with them?

2) If your opponent is good/pro enough to not be fooled by mind tricks, then why bother using them?
2a) It's better to work on your gameplay and deck piloting abilities instead of your mindtrick ones. Working on one helps you win. The other doesn't do shit.

I totally agree with the 1(a/b) sets of arguments. If your opponent is bad and you need mind tricks to win, then you really should be working on gameplay, not on being clever with the rules.

The 2(a) sets of arguments, however, are less persuasive. They operate on a fundamental assumption: good players are immune to mind tricks. While that might be a matter of ego and pride that all good players would probably attest to, but is it actually true? I do not think so.


I disagree with all of these. Player skill isn't the only deciding factor in the game of Magic (and indeed, like in Chess, you can make uncharacteristic mistakes).

You should always play to give yourself the maximum advantage at all times.

1/1a) We can all agree that well-executed bluffs or other mind games have the potential to win games. They also require practice. The question seems to be: Are you better off practicing technical aspects of play or working on your bluff skillz?

For at least two reasons, it's not open and shut. Obviously if you swing a 2/2 into a 2/3, you should work on your game first, but at some point it becomes hard to see an improvement in your technical play. You might still make mistakes, but with more practice there are only very slight incremental gains. Going from not understanding bluffs at all to being well versed in them might make a significant impact, however. If you're NEVER bluffing, you're probably also broadcasting tells.

A second reason is that you might find practicing bluffs fun and you might do it even if dedicating the same hours to technical play might improve your win percentage more. I find this thread a lot more entertaining than the "Should I Thoughtseize before Hymn?!" threads. We all play Magic at some level for fun, so I don't really think about how I'm devoting my practice time.

Is it better 1) To work on metagaming my deck? 2) To work on how to play that deck against the current field? 3) To work on my puzzle-solving ability? 4) To read up on Magic rules? 5) To practice bluffing? 6) To practice shuffling? 7) To practice player communication? 8) To work on other decks? 9) To play Limited or another Format to practice my fundamentals? etc. etc.

Good players have all these aspects to their game, but I doubt many players (if any) actually micromanage their time and choose which aspects to practice more. The fact is that bluffing can help, so it's certainly not a waste of time to practice.

1b) No matter how good you are, you won't ALWAYS win. If bluffing helped turn even a 95% matchup into a 97% matchup, it still helped. If each match took up an infinite number of games, then this argument might hold more water, but as it is even very bad players can still take two games from the very best players given the right circumstances.

I agree that the second arguments are bad, since good players will also fall for this stuff.



Bluffing is a tool that you use in Magic. The twin brother of bluffing is, "giving out true information."

While it's true that a bluff can leave you sunk (like your opponent catches you putting away Empty the Warrens and then he guesses that (you think that he'd think)^5 and then he figures out that you're not playing combo), if you don't at least know HOW to bluff, you're giving up real information.

A really good professional reader can probably tell when I'm bluffing and when I'm reacting to the situation, but since I'm only sitting down across from my opponent for 40-45 minutes, even the best players I'm likely to run into will have trouble finding a real pattern about my behavior. Even if he catches me bluffing, the best that it does for him is make him ignore everything that I say. Which is probably a good thing since if he looked really close he could probably find some true tells.

Contrast that to if I never bluff, or worse if I played like Jak. or a few other people in the thread and consciously avoided practicing how to bluff, I'm probably giving my opponent a lot of key pieces of information.


It might not be the best use of your time, but against good opponents, they'll definitely be paying attention to how you act. If you don't ever so much as look at the way that you act during a game, you're certainly giving out information to your opponent that your opponent can help to beat you.

[Nelis]

Pithing Needle doesn't target. Stop saying that it does.

You are right but that wasn't the point I tried to make.

[dahcmai]

Incidentally, Chapin is the one who did that trick with the Time Spiral also.

Where do you think the ruling for that card came from? Someone had to try it once and get away with it.

[cjva]

ktkenshinx

The point I'v been making isn't that mind games are bad, or that people shouldn't use em.

My biggest problem when people discuss mind games it most of the times it comes to that these players are douchbags. (I have never played Chapin, but i guess if i would he would be an insanely fun guy to play against). You can still play jedi mind tricks on people and be a nice guy.

My second point is that people shouldn't spend to much thinking about mind games. Sure, if there comes up a situation it does, and if you win thanks to it, you do. But rely focusing on jedi mind tricks are only useful when you are at the same level as Chapin, LSV etc. People that have come to a level in their game, where focusing on mind tricks actually has a better EV than focusing on their game.

And about your take back arguments. I would actually give take backs in semi's and finals. But my take back policy comes down to personal chemistry. If the guy i play against are a douch i wont give shit, but if i play against a person that threats his fellow nerds nicely I will for sure give take backs in any situation. Pretty much the same when it comes to time limitations. If i play against a person that's a nice guy, i speed up my game even more (I have a pretty stressed tempo to begin with) if we are close to time, even if the only thing that comes out of it, is that my opponent gets the chance to win. Same for playing with open hand after duress during every sort of tournament play. But then again, I'm a casual player at heart.

[dahcmai]

Actually Chapin is not fun at all to play against if he's in the mood to put you down and the pressure is on. He's a laugh most of the time, but when he's on the warpath, he'll drive you nuts. He likes to distract people and he's really good at it. He's who taught me how to play (better) and get past the tabletop mode. He used to live around here. I wanted to kill him most of the time, but he can be fun. Used to drive me nuts how good he was at reading people. He'd figure out your hand by watching you as he played his cards and guage your reactions. It was so annoying how he'd name he card you were going to play and have the answer all ready and waiting and make you feel like a fool for playing it.

For the most part it was nice playing against someone really good though. It's amazing how much better at the game you get when you constantly play someone better than yourself. I will give him credit, he's an awesome player. It really made the games where you won worth it.

[Vacrix]

Actually Chapin is not fun at all to play against if he's in the mood to put you down and the pressure is on. He's a laugh most of the time, but when he's on the warpath, he'll drive you nuts. He likes to distract people and he's really good at it. He's who taught me how to play (better) and get past the tabletop mode. He used to live around here. I wanted to kill him most of the time, but he can be fun. Used to drive me nuts how good he was at reading people. He'd figure out your hand by watching you as he played his cards and guage your reactions. It was so annoying how he'd name he card you were going to play and have the answer all ready and waiting and make you feel like a fool for playing it.

For the most part it was nice playing against someone really good though. It's amazing how much better at the game you get when you constantly play someone better than yourself. I will give him credit, he's an awesome player. It really made the games where you won worth it.
I'd be surprised if Pro's were fun to play against. There are people who play for 'fun' and people who play seriously. Magic for the lols is always great but in tournaments I put on my game face as well.

[cdr]

I'd be surprised if Pro's were fun to play against. There are people who play for 'fun' and people who play seriously. Magic for the lols is always great but in tournaments I put on my game face as well.

You don't know much, then, and that's probably your problem. People can have a lot of fun, even in the top 8 of a Pro Tour.

[Vacrix]

Sure you can, but magic takes a lot of concentration. You can't fuck around like you can when playing casually. The Pro-Tour top 8 might be fun, but the avg player who is playing against a Pro might not have a good time, especially when he is calling out your spells before you play them. I was commenting on dachmai's experience with Chapin. From the looks of it, he doesn't look like much fun to play against either but I would expect that from a Pro given how far up the food chain Chapin is.

[SpikeyMikey]

Technically speaking, Chapin would have to have said the following for the play to be 100% within the rules:

"I cast Profane Command with an X value of 6. Of the two choices, I choose that 'Target player loses X life' and 'X target creatures gain fear until end of turn'. I announce you as the target of the life loss. I announce Cloudthresher, Wilt-Leaf Sage, and Wilt-Leaf Sage as my targets to gain fear. I pass priority."

Imagine if every play worked out like that. Magic would be at a grinding halt, and judges would be flying around the room to get people to be less obnoxious and hurry up. Like any player in that situation, Chapin said the far easier, and far more deceptive, "Profane command. You lose 6 life and all my legal targets gain fear."

He never specified how many creatures gained fear. He never told his opponent that Colossus had fear. Indeed, by saying "legal targets", he was effectively saying that Colossus did not have fear, as anyone could see it was a highly illegal target. If his opponent had asked for clarification, Chapin would certainly have explained what had fear and what did not. Chapin did not say "I give all my creatures fear," or "All my creatures gain fear"; that would have been illegal and would have resulted in a loss.

Was it tricky? Yes. Was it cheating? No.

-ktkenshinx-

While I respect and like Chapin as a theorist, he's a dickhead player and if I sat down across from him at a tournament, you can bet your ass I'd make him announce everything, whether it drew out the match or not. I'd rather draw than see dickheads prosper. That BS he pulled in Chicago with the CB trigger left a bad taste in mouth.

You can argue that the morality isn't absolute but no morality is. There are still invisible lines and if you cross them, you're going to get a reputation. Maybe you care, maybe you don't, but if you go out of your way to screw people, they will go out of their way to screw back. I don't do it much anymore because I've got a nice car now and I'm less inclined to hit people with it, but I used to be a big one for running people off the road. Fuck with me on the highway and I will put you in a ditch. Is it illegal to ride side by side with someone while you're in the fast lane and block traffic? No, but it's damned rude and when I was driving a beater I wasn't afraid to push people off the road for it.

[Arsenal]

While I respect and like Chapin as a theorist, he's a dickhead player and if I sat down across from him at a tournament, you can bet your ass I'd make him announce everything, whether it drew out the match or not. I'd rather draw than see dickheads prosper. That BS he pulled in Chicago with the CB trigger left a bad taste in mouth.

To be fair, when you're playing at the highest levels, against presumably high tier players, with actual money, prizes, etc. on the line, plenty of people, not just Chapin, get real stingy with rules and interactions.

[Nihil Credo]

I don't do it much anymore because I've got a nice car now and I'm less inclined to hit people with it, but I used to be a big one for running people off the road. Fuck with me on the highway and I will put you in a ditch. Is it illegal to ride side by side with someone while you're in the fast lane and block traffic? No, but it's damned rude and when I was driving a beater I wasn't afraid to push people off the road for it.

I'm undecided which possibility I should find more odious - that you just confessed to multiple attempted murders (for futile reasons too) or that you believe making up such a story would make you look all tough and badass.


Incidentally, Chapin is the one who did that trick with the Time Spiral also.

Where do you think the ruling for that card came from? Someone had to try it once and get away with it.

Do you have a source, or can you at least provide more detailed circumstances? I found nothing on the Internet about it, and pretending that Time Spiral targets (in contradiction with both the printed card text and any Oracle text ever used) can in no way be described as a "Jedi mind trick" - it's cheating, pure and simple, and a stupid cheat too since it requires a really gullible opponent or a really negligent judge to pull off. If I were Chapin and if this didn't actually happen, I'd be extremely pissed off that you spread that story.

[SpikeyMikey]

I'm not sure where you're getting an epeen attempt out of that. The point isn't whether or not I'm a badass, it's that you can be shady if you want, but you will eventually piss off someomne with the capacity and the will to escalate things far more than you ever wanted to go, and by the time you realize that you've bitten off more than you can chew, it's too late.

I'm probably one of the nicest people you will ever meet, it's just that when you push me too far, I don't just bitch impotently about it, I make sure you end up far more miserable than I do. But as long as people aren't dicks to me, I'm a teddy bear.

Edit: Oh, attempted murder is a bit of hyperbole, wouldn't you say?

[Nihil Credo]

Edit: Oh, attempted murder is a bit of hyperbole, wouldn't you say?
No, it is not. You revolting worthless scum of the Earth.

Crashing one's car into a ditch carries a clear and insanely high risk of death, and you are not mentally retarded enough to claim ignorance of that. You have asserted that you deliberately attempted to make others crash into a ditch, for no reason other than being mildly pissed off because of at some rude behaviour.

According to your claims, you are guilty of something ranging from voluntary manslaughter to second-degree murder, depending on the definitions employed by the local law and the skill of your lawyer.

How you deal with that knowledge is your own business. For everyone else, given the unlikelihood of getting you convicted for your (supposed) actions, the proper civilised behaviour is to shun you as a dangerous, reckless hazard to society.

[Amon Amarth]

I think gorillas are pretty badass. I imagine acting like one is pretty much the apex of awesomeness.

[alderon666]

I don't think it's wrong to get stingy on the rules, I just think you have to know what you're doing. I get so pissed off when people who don't know the rules try to make some crazy rulings about priority, layers, targets or something.

I mean, you don't have to be a douche to demand a certain level of play from your opponent. Stuff like asking if stuff resolved instead of just insta-resolving Brainstorms or Top activations or asking them to stop at a certain step in their turn.

But the general idea that focusing on your game > crazy tactics is mostly true. I feel that people pay little attentions to stuff like shuffling (or not shuffling well enough), opponents plays and what they mean, your own plays and what they mean for you opponents,... I could go on.

[Forbiddian]

I don't do it much anymore because I've got a nice car now and I'm less inclined to hit people with it, but I used to be a big one for running people off the road. Fuck with me on the highway and I will put you in a ditch. Is it illegal to ride side by side with someone while you're in the fast lane and block traffic? No, but it's damned rude and when I was driving a beater I wasn't afraid to push people off the road for it.

Nice, knock 'em out of the tournament before they even show up.

Now that's what I call Guerilla Tactics!


No, seriously, go to jail. There's a big fucking difference between causing someone bodily harm (and potentially killing them/hit and run) and telling him that he missed a trigger. I'm really fucking afraid for society that you psychopaths can't tell the difference.

[Vacrix]

Nice, knock 'em out of the tournament before they even show up.

Now that's what I call Guerilla Tactics!
Given my record against you in tournaments and the fact that I play you first every time, I should probably try this. :P
Or I could spike your drink with ecstasy. --> "OH MY GOD THE CARDS ARE SO SOFT!"

[Nelis]

You don't know much, then, and that's probably your problem. People can have a lot of fun, even in the top 8 of a Pro Tour.

Sure, all is fine and dandy if you're in the top 8 with your other pro buddies. Let's just say that there are pro's who do not have the decency to act normal to players they don't know. I know this from first and second hand experience. There's nothing wrong with being stingy with the rules. If I make a mistake I'm sure not getting angry when its being pointed out to me. But some normal interaction would be nice. No need to give 'lesser' players a hard time (trashtalk, mind tricks and such) when it's clear you're the better player.

[SpikeyMikey]

No, it is not. You revolting worthless scum of the Earth.

Crashing one's car into a ditch carries a clear and insanely high risk of death, and you are not mentally retarded enough to claim ignorance of that. You have asserted that you deliberately attempted to make others crash into a ditch, for no reason other than being mildly pissed off because of at some rude behaviour.

According to your claims, you are guilty of something ranging from voluntary manslaughter to second-degree murder, depending on the definitions employed by the local law and the skill of your lawyer.

How you deal with that knowledge is your own business. For everyone else, given the unlikelihood of getting you convicted for your (supposed) actions, the proper civilised behaviour is to shun you as a dangerous, reckless hazard to society.

Clear and insanely high risk? Yeah, you're smoking something. Or you had the strangest physics class I've ever heard of. But it's not an exaggeration. No, no. In fact, you weren't making out to be serious enough the first time. It's not attempted murder, it's manslaughter to second-degree murder!

I was not aware that one coudl be guilty of murder without causing the slightest bit of harm to someone. Thank you, Nihil, for educating poor scum like me.

I'm done with this thread, this is ridiculous. I made my point.

[xTrainx]

Clear and insanely high risk? Yeah, you're smoking something. Or you had the strangest physics class I've ever heard of. But it's not an exaggeration. No, no. In fact, you weren't making out to be serious enough the first time. It's not attempted murder, it's manslaughter to second-degree murder!

I was not aware that one coudl be guilty of murder without causing the slightest bit of harm to someone. Thank you, Nihil, for educating poor scum like me.

I'm done with this thread, this is ridiculous. I made my point.

Firstly, not believing that running someone of the road is just fucking ignorant; people die by running off the road without being hit by another car - they don't need your worthless ass doing it for them.

Someone needs to research his laws before he opens his mouth - second degree murder is defined as a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life <- this is you.

"This is ridiculous?" Are you fucking kidding me? Your fucking ridiculous.

[Obfuscate Freely]

Hey, let's be fair here. Camping in the passing lane is pretty rude. Shit pisses me off, too.

[Meekrab]

Hey, let's be fair here. Camping in the passing lane is pretty rude. Shit pisses me off, too.
Yeah, and not letting your buddy's girlfriend go through a door ahead of you is rude too, but we stopped fighting duels over it in the 1800s.

[xTrainx]

Hey, let's be fair here. Camping in the passing lane is pretty rude. Shit pisses me off, too.

Of course it pisses you off. The difference between you and him is that you get pissed off, maybe throw a couple fingers his way, but you don't partake in life-threatening activities.
He does.

[Morrison103]

While I respect and like Chapin as a theorist, he's a dickhead player and if I sat down across from him at a tournament, you can bet your ass I'd make him announce everything, whether it drew out the match or not. I'd rather draw than see dickheads prosper. That BS he pulled in Chicago with the CB trigger left a bad taste in mouth.

You can argue that the morality isn't absolute but no morality is. There are still invisible lines and if you cross them, you're going to get a reputation. Maybe you care, maybe you don't, but if you go out of your way to screw people, they will go out of their way to screw back. I don't do it much anymore because I've got a nice car now and I'm less inclined to hit people with it, but I used to be a big one for running people off the road. Fuck with me on the highway and I will put you in a ditch. Is it illegal to ride side by side with someone while you're in the fast lane and block traffic? No, but it's damned rude and when I was driving a beater I wasn't afraid to push people off the road for it.

This is my kind of guy more power to ya man!!!!!!!!!!

[Vacrix]

Of course it pisses you off. The difference between you and him is that you get pissed off, maybe throw a couple fingers his way, but you don't partake in life-threatening activities.
He does.
Don't forget, Obfuscate Freely is also The Ultimate Driving Machine. Obviously he would be pissed. How can he freely obfuscate when you are camping in his lane? I'd be pissed too.

[bakofried]

@Morrison103:
Please leave the thread. The last discussion was about how he was a dangerous dick and shouldn't be trusted outside of jail, much less in a car. You want to ally yourself with him?

Also, my advice: just move ahead of them. People pass on the right all the time, at least on the I-5; if someone's being an ass, you pass them, whether it be on the right or the left. Flipping the bird is optional.

[oldbsturgeon]

To be on the on-off topic discussion:
Here in WV, this is a fairly common practice in construction zones. Just like with unions, coal mines, or chemical plants, the people working for the DOT are revered almost by a certain group and when the signs on the highway say "give 'em a break" they mean it.
Recently both lanes on I-64 west and east bound were being worked on, but you would know about 4 miles ahead of the lane closure which one it was.
Still lots of people would ride the closed lane until the very end, and all that does is cause for backups,
Well if the right person is around that will not happen. Ususally its an 18-wheeler that blocks the lane, but last week I saw a utility work truck block the lane on an audi. The truck then appeared to merge into the open right lane but was only playing as he swerved back and made the audi go into the median on the grass to try and pass him.
I would see this quite a bit traveling from work to home each day.

On the off-on topic discussion:
I knew of someone that did this at regionals several years ago at the ohio one when there were like 683 people playing. He had tokens in the box stating he was playing goblins(during onslaught standard) but was playing something very different.
He said it worked a bit for him, when people paid attention to him and saw the tokens. He won a few rounds with that trick.
The obvious trick everyone does is bluff counterspells, which I do, but thats about it.
My other gameplan is that when people start doing that ticky-autistic behavior of flipping cards and other weird habits, being a cousnelor, I typically suggest an appropriate place for them to receivng counseling.
Messes them all up when they think there is something wrong with them:tongue:

[dahcmai]

Wow, this thread got seriously derailed and aggroish.

I'll see if I can find something on the net about that Time Spiral thing, though it was only word of mouth from him when we were playing at a block tournament together. I was surprised also, but I guess you could do that with the old rules. Anyway, if I find it I'll pm you the link, this thread is worth ducking out of now.

[mujadaddy]

I get so pissed off when people who don't know the rules try to make some crazy rulings about priority, layers, targets or something.
...and that's why I don't play decks with insane game interactions -- isn't it supposed to be FUN? ;)

Apropos of off-topic, my dad used to have this beat up Chevy pickup in the late '80s. One day he was driving the 20~ miles from the nearest big town back to his house along a 4-lane medianed highway. Some young adults in a convertible Mustang or somesuch had pulled along side him in the passing lane, started mocking him and decided to fuck with him -- they threw a little ice from their drinks onto his elbow.

He gave their car a little love tap. They slowed down and made a u-turn back the other way.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The moral is that you don't know how crazy or stupid the person you're jousting with is, so it's best to leave it alone.

[pi4meterftw]

...and that's why I don't play decks with insane game interactions -- isn't it supposed to be FUN? ;)

Apropos of off-topic, my dad used to have this beat up Chevy pickup in the late '80s. One day he was driving the 20~ miles from the nearest big town back to his house along a 4-lane medianed highway. Some young adults in a convertible Mustang or somesuch had pulled along side him in the passing lane, started mocking him and decided to fuck with him -- they threw a little ice from their drinks onto his elbow.

He gave their car a little love tap. They slowed down and made a u-turn back the other way.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The moral is that you don't know how crazy or stupid the person you're jousting with is, so it's best to leave it alone.

Wow no wonder trolling on the internet is so effective. People don't know how to not try to get the last word (action) in when others annoy them.