View Full Version : Infracture Procedure Guidelines -- implications of changes to 'may' ruling
Here is the official update in regards to optional abilities:
1.4. OPTIONAL ABILITIES
Traditionally, some abilities include the word ‘may’ as part of their text, indicating that their effect is optional. At Competitive and Professional REL, some additional triggered abilities and enters-the-battlefield replacement effects are considered optional. The player is not required to follow the instruction when the ability resolves, and if the ability is forgotten it will not retroactively be applied. An optional ability does one or more of the following things, and nothing else:
•Gains you life or causes an opponent to lose life.
•Puts cards from your library, graveyard, or exile zones into your hand or onto the battlefield. This includes
•drawing cards.
•Causes opponents to put objects from their hand or the battlefield into the library, graveyard or exile.
•Puts a permanent into play under your control or gives you control of a permanent.
•Puts +x/+x counters, or counters linked to a beneficial effect, on a permanent you control.
•Gives +x/+x or a beneficial ability to a target creature you control.
•Exiles, damages, destroys, taps, or gives -x/-x to an opponent's target permanent. If the ability could target
•your own permanents, it is not optional unless that ability could target an opponent.
•Gives you additional turns or phases.
•Counters a spell or conditionally counters a spell, but only when cast by an opponent.
Abilities that trigger at the same point in each players turn and do something to “that player” (e.g. Howling Mine) are never optional.
This list is comprehensive. An ability that does not fit all of the criteria above is not optional, even if it is to the benefit of the player controlling the ability. Similarly, an optional ability is always optional, even if it would be to the detriment of the player for it to happen.
I'm wondering if based on this new ruling some cards will receive new Oracle wordings to reflect their true nature under this new ruling.
Take for example Argothian Enchantress:
Argothian Enchantress
1G
Creature - Human Druid
Shroud
Whenever you cast an enchantment spell, draw a card.
0/1
Under the old ruling, the draw trigger was mandatory. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the new IPG, but it seems like this trigger would now become optional, much like the one on Verduran Enchantress ('whenever you cast an enchantment spell, you may draw a card').
In general, draw triggers are always beneficial, but for example in the Enchantress deck, decking yourself due to drawing too many cards is a legitimate concern in some narrow cases. Would 'strategically forgetting' the draw trigger be allowable, or would this be an actual rules infraction?
I'm sure there are other examples in Legacy where this new ruling on triggers would have some actual implications. Personally I think they should just go back and retroactively change the oracle wording on cards like this to avoid any confusion.
Thanks.
There are others things about the language of this new ruling that I'm not so keen on. To illustrate them, I'll be using some convoluted examples, but bear with me...
•Gains you life or causes an opponent to lose life.
---Suppose an opponent had cast False Cure earlier in the turn or has a Kavu Predator in play. Gaining life may actually be non-beneficial.
Puts +x/+x counters, or counters linked to a beneficial effect, on a permanent you control.
---Suppose your opponent is at two life, has two cards in hand, and has an Ensnaring Bridge. You can strategically 'forget' to give your Snapcaster Mage a +1/+1 counter to swing for the win.
•Gives you additional turns or phases.
---The card name escapes me, but suppose there's one that grants a second upkeep phase. Suppose you are at low life and have a Dark Confidant out, or suppose your opponent has a Tangle Wire/Smokestack.
Plenty of other examples I'm sure. This change in ruling may not effect Standard or Limited too much, but there are some far-reaching implications in Legacy/Vintage.
Transcendance
Enchantment
3WWW
You don't lose the game for having 0 or less life.
When you have 20 or more life, you lose the game.
Whenever you lose life, you gain 2 life for each 1 life you lost. (Damage dealt to you causes you to lose life.)
??
I'm wondering if based on this new ruling some cards will receive new Oracle wordings to reflect their true nature under this new ruling.
No; the intent of the rule is to better handle cards like Soul Warden without changing any card wordings. I wonder if the GP Boston T8 I judged had anything to do with this; half the T8 would've been DQed for missing Soul Warden triggers had the HJ not issued special instructions :)
Under the old ruling, the draw trigger was mandatory. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the new IPG, but it seems like this trigger would now become optional, much like the one on Verduran Enchantress ('whenever you cast an enchantment spell, you may draw a card').
In general, draw triggers are always beneficial, but for example in the Enchantress deck, decking yourself due to drawing too many cards is a legitimate concern in some narrow cases. Would 'strategically forgetting' the draw trigger be allowable, or would this be an actual rules infraction?
It makes all such triggers optional; you can now skip them without penalty, whether you forgot or both you and your opponent remember. Decking yourself is now much harder.
I'm sure there are other examples in Legacy where this new ruling on triggers would have some actual implications. Personally I think they should just go back and retroactively change the oracle wording on cards like this to avoid any confusion.
In order to minimize confusion with older cards, Wizards does not "retroactively change Oracle wording". The only time they change wording is when they reprint a card.
Transcendance
Yes, under the new rule you can decline the lifegain trigger.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Chuck, but reading through the other thread I'm under the impression this only works at Competitive and Professional REL. Any lower REL event mandatory triggers are still just that?
Correct me if I'm wrong, Chuck, but reading through the other thread I'm under the impression this only works at Competitive and Professional REL. Any lower REL event mandatory triggers are still just that?
This is true, but the IPG doesn't cover Regular. The "Judging At Regular" (JAR) does, and I would think it'll be updated to say the same thing.
As of right now though, yes, there's no optional trigger provision at Regular. There's no penalties at Regular though, just "if a player forgets a mandatory trigger immediately resolve it".
I'm not very happy with the way Transcendence ends up working under this rules change.
Honestly, a Platinum Angel/Emperion effect on a 3WWW enchantment is not exactly overpowered, but the fact that it's only functioning that way due to a rules-lawyering loophole kind of goies against the 'spirit' of the card's original intention.
It's unlikely that it's playable even as a Platinum effect, since it's basically just acting as a 'super' Solitary Confinement that costs 6 and without the upkeep drawback.
But I imagine there are many other cases where the option of 'beneficial' triggers makes a card broken/better. For example, I think Jin Gitaxias' Draw 7 is optional under the new ruling. Granted, a resolved Jin is likely going to win the game anyways, but there are cases where you can avoid decking yourself with it.
For example, I think Jin Gitaxias' Draw 7 is optional under the new ruling.
Since it's nothing but "draw seven cards" it is, yes.
Ugh typical WotC. Changes the way we play and doesn't clarify any sweeping changes. I don't agree with optional draw triggers being retroactively changed without an official errata for specific cards. It also doesn't gel with the philosophy of having cards do as printed and not require looking up errata elsewere. Decking from forced draw triggers is still highly relevant in Eternal.
Julian23
12-20-2011, 11:58 AM
It's funny how you can't decline to draw cards of your own Standstill, as it's not just beneficial to you because you also have to sacrifice it :laugh:.
I also wonder, if this might create difficult to handle situations in multiplayer games. You drawing cards is beneficial, but how about you and two other players drawing cards? I guess this isn't strictly beneficial. Still, interesting.
Please keep all discussion in Community (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?22830-Penalty-Guidelines-Reminding-Your-Opponent-CHANGES). This thread is fine for rules-related questions.
I also wonder, if this might create difficult to handle situations in multiplayer games. You drawing cards is beneficial, but how about you and two other players drawing cards? I guess this isn't strictly beneficial. Still, interesting.
Since it's not you and only you drawing cards, it's not optional. Certainly it would make sense to update it in the future to include teammates, but not currently.
Anusien
12-20-2011, 02:49 PM
It will help you learn the new changes if you stop checking whether a trigger is "beneficial" and only pay attention to whether it meets the criteria of an Optional Ability in 1.4.
Julian23
12-20-2011, 02:55 PM
They're only "Optional Abilities" because they're beneficial. At least that's what's the underlying intention of this rule in the first place.
I can see why you dislike "beneficial" as it might cause people to not realize that there's a very clear (yet long) list of criteria for "Optional abilities".
Malchar
12-20-2011, 03:21 PM
Where was this update posted?
Where was this update posted?
The WPN documents area, like usual for tournament documents:
http://www.wizards.com/ContentResources/Wizards/WPN/Main/Documents/Magic_The_Gathering_Infraction_Procedure_Guide_PDF2.pdf
Nihil Credo
12-20-2011, 04:23 PM
If I have the following card in play:
Adhoc Madeupaton - :2:
Artifact Creature
At the beginning of your upkeep, target creature you control gains shroud until end of turn.
1/1
is its trigger optional?
If I have the following card in play:
Adhoc Madeupaton - :2:
Artifact Creature
At the beginning of your upkeep, target creature gains shroud until end of turn.
1/1
is its trigger optional?
If it targets any creature clearly no...
If it's "target creature you control" - from what I see yes; the exact meaning of "beneficial" needs clarification from the L5s but they are apparently not yet prepared to provide it.
Beatusnox
12-20-2011, 05:33 PM
Counters a spell or conditionally counters a spell, but only when cast by an opponent.
Is this referencing an ability like Kira, Great Glass-Spinner? I am not thinking extremely clearly right now so the wording on this one has me a little perplexed.
Is this referencing an ability like Kira, Great Glass-Spinner? I am not thinking extremely clearly right now so the wording on this one has me a little perplexed.
Kira doesn't fit because it counters from any source, not just opponents.
The "only when cast by an opponent" applies to both "counters a spell" and "conditionally counters a spell".
I can't think of many; Chancellor of the Annex, flipped Erayo, Frost Titan, Invoke Prejudice...
The intricacy of the wording required should've probably been a clue it was a bad idea.
pandaman
12-21-2011, 01:45 AM
"Traditionally, some abilities include the word ‘may’ as part of their text, indicating that their effect is optional. At Competitive and Professional REL, some additional triggered abilities and enters-the-battlefield replacement effects are considered optional. The player is not required to follow the instruction when the ability resolves, and if the ability is forgotten it will not retroactively be applied."
Is there a distinction between remembering the trigger but not following the instruction when the ability resolves, and forgetting the trigger altogether?
Is it the case that if you indicate the trigger is on the stack and resolve it, you can not follow the trigger instruction during resolution without getting a warning, but if you forget the trigger and someone calls a judge on you (it would seem they can do that because they no longer have to remind you to resolve the trigger), you get a warning as is usual for a missed trigger?
That leads to the question, what if you don't mention the trigger at all when it should resolve? Is that classed as not following the trigger instruction on resolution, or missing the trigger altogether?
How many warnings for missed triggers can you accumulate before you get a game/match loss, and what procedure does the judge have to use to give someone a match loss for multiple missed triggers?
cdr, you're going to have your work cut out for you in this thread. Modpayrise?
Is there a distinction between remembering the trigger but not following the instruction when the ability resolves, and forgetting the trigger altogether?
Is it the case that if you indicate the trigger is on the stack and resolve it, you can not follow the trigger instruction during resolution without getting a warning, but if you forget the trigger and someone calls a judge on you (it would seem they can do that because they no longer have to remind you to resolve the trigger), you get a warning as is usual for a missed trigger?
That leads to the question, what if you don't mention the trigger at all when it should resolve? Is that classed as not following the trigger instruction on resolution, or missing the trigger altogether?
How many warnings for missed triggers can you accumulate before you get a game/match loss, and what procedure does the judge have to use to give someone a match loss for multiple missed triggers?
cdr, you're going to have your work cut out for you in this thread. Modpayrise?
1) There's no difference. If you forget and move on, it's assumed it triggered, resolved, and you chose not apply the effect of the trigger.
2) Yes, you can skip the effect of the trigger on resolution. Per the IPG, you don't get a Missed Trigger penalty if you forget an optional trigger.
3) Again, same thing either way. You can mention it, not mention it, or forget it - all the same.
4) You get two Game Play Error warnings total per tournament (Missed Trigger, Failure to Reveal, Looking at Extra, Drawing Extra, Improper Draw at Start, Game Rule Violation). The third or subsequent is a game loss each time - never a match loss. As far as procedure, most Game Losses (save for simple stuff like decklist penalties) have to be approved by the HJ - he/she may want to have a word with you if you're picking up multiple game losses for warnings :)
Parcher
12-21-2011, 01:59 PM
Let's say I'm playing Dredge. My opponent attempts to cast Surgical Extraction on an Ichorid in my graveyard. In response, I activate Cephalid Coliseum, choosing to replace the draws from it with Dredge. During the course of it's resolution, an Emrakul is revealed, and it's trigger goes on the stack above the Extraction.
Can I choose to not "conditionally counter a spell controlled by an opponent", which is exactly what would happen if the Emrakul shuffle resolves, and "miss" the trigger?
Anusien
12-21-2011, 02:10 PM
Whether something is optional or not ignores the board state. Think of it as "If something meets all these criteria, pretend it has the word may in it."
Emrakul's shuffle ability is not optional.
Parcher
12-21-2011, 02:20 PM
Annihilator isn't optional either. But we've already been told that you can choose to ignore that trigger.
Let's say I'm playing Dredge. My opponent attempts to cast Surgical Extraction on an Ichorid in my graveyard. In response, I activate Cephalid Coliseum, choosing to replace the draws from it with Dredge. During the course of it's resolution, an Emrakul is revealed, and it's trigger goes on the stack above the Extraction.
Can I choose to not "conditionally counter a spell controlled by an opponent", which is exactly what would happen if the Emrakul shuffle resolves, and "miss" the trigger?
What would happen isn't relevant - what's relevant is what the ability says. That part of the rule applies only to abilities that say they counter spells your opponents control.
Parcher
12-21-2011, 02:33 PM
Or, conditionally counter an opponent's spell, as the new guideline reads. Removing a spell's target to "fizzle" it, has always been the definition of a spell being countered by condition. Or as commonly said, upon resolution. Which the Emrakul trigger's resolution will cause.
Or, conditionally counter an opponent's spell, as the new guideline reads. Removing a spell's target to "fizzle" it, has always been the definition of a spell being countered by condition. Or as commonly said, upon resolution. Which the Emrakul trigger's resolution will cause.
Again, irrelevant. If a card has one of the things from 1.4 printed on it, it fits. If it doesn't, it doesn't.
Parcher
12-21-2011, 02:40 PM
That makes some sense. But then, why would they add "conditionally counters a spell, but only when cast by an opponent"? As far as I know, there isn't a single card that has that printed on it.
That makes some sense. But then, why would they add "conditionally counters a spell, but only when cast by an opponent"? As far as I know, there isn't a single card that has that printed on it.
Frost Titan and company fit. Conditional and only by opponents.
Parcher
12-21-2011, 02:49 PM
Got it. Has to read as such on the specific card. Thanks Chuck.
I just want to make sure I understand this correctly:
Tainted Aether now can be ignored by my opponents when I control it?
EDIT: or rather, since I control it, I put the trigger on the stack, and chose to make it optional?
I just want to make sure I understand this correctly:
Tainted Aether now can be ignored by my opponents when I control it?
Not sure whether Tainted Aether fits criteria #3 ("Causes opponents to put objects from their hand or the battlefield into the library, graveyard or exile.") or not, to be honest. Not sure whether they intend "opponents" to be exclusive or not. If it does fit, you as the controller could choose whether to apply the effect when it resolved.
Unrelatedly, the Missed Trigger change means your opponent can allow the trigger to be missed if you (the controller) forget it.
Anusien
12-21-2011, 04:19 PM
Annihilator isn't optional either. But we've already been told that you can choose to ignore that trigger.
Annhilator is optional.
Tainted Aether is not optional.
Tainted Aether is not optional.
If it isn't, some of Eric's examples on C-F are possibly incorrect.
On a closer reading, Tainted AEther is not optional since it's ambiguous regarding a clear player for the trigger. It would be optional if it only affected your opponent; and would be mandatory if it affected only you. Since it's affecting both players with a specific controller trigger, it's mandatory.
I can tell already 2012 competitive magic is not going to be fun.
sauce
12-22-2011, 04:49 PM
so if you normally never miss any triggers, your own or opponents, then this change is pretty irrelevant to your tournament experience afaik, correct?
For the most part, except some existing "must trigger" are now "may trigger". That's the big contention.
Julian23
12-22-2011, 05:42 PM
so if you normally never miss any triggers, your own or opponents, then this change is pretty irrelevant to your tournament experience afaik, correct?
Incorrect. This rule adds a new level to the game, allowing you to deliberately skip certain mandatory triggers.
The Jan 2012 IPG has been retracted. The new version will not have the "optional beneficial triggers" section 1.4.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/28790499/January_2012_IPG_Revisions?sdb=1
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.