The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale and forgotten triggers

[Köffaß]

Hi,

following scenario occured yesterday in tournament: Opponent is playing lands and has one The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale in play and me controlling Progenitus. It is my upkeep now, I untap, forget the trigger, proceed to draw step. My opponent says that I did not pay for the trigger and therefore the Progenitus is destroyed. I was not willing to accept that since we played on competitive level and the policy about triggers says that triggered abilities that are forgotten are not considered to have gone onto the stack:

4.4 Triggered Abilities
Players are expected to remember their own triggered abilities; intentionally ignoring one is Cheating.
At Competitive and Professional REL, players are not required to point out the existence of triggered abilities that they do not control, though they may do so within a turn if they wish.
Triggered abilities are considered to be forgotten by their controller once they have taken an action past the point where the triggered ability would be expected to resolve. Triggered abilities that are forgotten are not considered to have gone onto the stack.

So we called a judge. The judge (level 1) said that the Progenitus is destroyed. This feels pretty damn unfair... especially because the Progenitus would have killed him that turn and I had tons of mana to pay that damn upkeep trigger.

So was the judge decision correct? What do you guys think?

[Themirror]

Yes, this is a correct decision under the current rules. The Tabernacle gives a triggered ability to your Progenitus. Thus you are the controller of the triggered ability and this ability also has a default action associated with it ("destroy it, unless..."), so the opponent can choose to let the trigger resolve later because you forgot it and the default action takes place.

[mini1337s]

The ruling was correct, however, you could appeal if your opponent was hiding the Tabernacle (aka, it was under a stack of lands, or something to that effect).

[Köffaß]

I'm totally aware that the Progenitus, which I control, has that annoying triggered ability on it and therefore I have to remember it. That was not the question
; )

The question was: How does the new policy about triggered abilities and forgetting about those effect this case?

[mini1337s]

I'm totally aware that the Progenitus, which I control, has that annoying triggered ability on it and therefore I have to remember it. That was not the question
; )

The question was: How does the new policy about triggered abilities and forgetting about those effect this case?
You already had the answer in your inital post:

"Triggered abilities are considered to be forgotten by their controller once they have taken an action past the point where the triggered ability would be expected to resolve."

The triggers are controlled by you, and once you draw your card, it's assumed you choose to not pay for the Tabernacle and have to sacrifice your creature. Once again, if the Tabernacle had been hidden, you could appeal, and your opponent could be DQ'd for cheating, but in the case that it's easily visible, the Judge ruled correctly.

[Köffaß]

Yeah, and:

"Triggered abilities that are forgotten are not considered to have gone onto the stack."

Which means that they don't happen, right?

[mini1337s]

Yeah, and:

"Triggered abilities that are forgotten are not considered to have gone onto the stack."

Which means that they don't happen, right?
That refers to something a bit different, and I can see you being confused as the wording is a bit weird.
In the cases where an ability like, well, let's say you have an artifact in play that gives a creature a +1/+1 counter when it enters the battlefield. You play the creature, don't announce the trigger, and move to the next phase, and then you try and backtrack to get the +1/+1 counter. That clause prevents cases like that.
Otherwise, a player could just never pay for the Tabernacle trigger, and just say, "I forgot." There is no way to prove you actually forgot, unless your opponent was actively trying to hide the effect, IE Tabernacle under a stack of lands.

[Köffaß]

Otherwise, a player could just never pay for the Tabernacle trigger, and just say, "I forgot." There is no way to prove you actually forgot, unless your opponent was actively trying to hide the effect, IE Tabernacle under a stack of lands.

For that case the player, who controls the Tabernacle, may remind the active player to pay the cost or sacrifice the creature. Which actually sounds pretty logic to me, since it is his permanent, which grants my permanent that upkeep trigger. Imo you can't expect a player to not forget about triggers granted by cards he doesn't play.

Well, after reading this

If the trigger specifies a default action associated with a choice made by the controller of the trigger (usually “If you don’t …” or “… unless”), resolve the default action immediately without using the stack. If there are unresolved spells or abilities that are no longer legal as a result of this action, rewind the game to remove all such spells or abilities. Resulting triggers generated by the action still trigger and resolve as normal.

I've come to the conlusion that you are right. Though, in this case I find that decision to be pretty retarded. I would agree about it a 100% f.e. if the Progenitus had that Tabernacle ability on default and therefore it would only be my fault.
Stealing games that way is pretty annoying....

[Esper3k]

To be fair, you forgot an upkeep cost at a competitive REL event so it's really more like you punting the game than him stealing the game (unless again, he mislead you on the Tabernacle being in play).

[mini1337s]

While I can empathize with you (we all miss triggers from time to time) the onus is on you to ensure you are aware of the gamestate at all times. The Judge's ruling was correct and falls within the rules for Competitive REL.

[Köffaß]

Well, whatever...

At least that will not happen again.

[Tammit67]

From the Infraction Procedure Guide, under the Missed Trigger Section:


Definition
A triggered ability triggers, but the player controlling the ability doesn’t demonstrate awareness of the trigger’s existence and/or forgets to announce its effect. If a triggered ability has been partially or incorrectly resolved, instead treat it as a Game Play Error — Game Rule Violation.
A trigger is considered missed once the controller of the trigger has taken an action after the point at which a trigger should have resolved or, in the case of a trigger controlled by the non-active player, after that player has taken an action that indicates they have actively passed priority. Players may not cause triggered abilities to be missed by taking game actions or otherwise prematurely advancing the game. For example, if a player draws a card during his or her draw step without allowing the controller of a triggered ability that would trigger during that turn’s upkeep to resolve it, place that trigger on the stack at this point and issue no penalty.
Examples
A. A player controls Braids, Cabal Minion. After he has declared attackers, he realizes that he has failed to sacrifice a permanent at the beginning of his upkeep.
B. A player realizes that she forgot to remove the final counter from a suspended spell.
C. A player forgets to pay the cumulative upkeep cost for a creature.
D. A player controls Soul Warden and forgets to gain 1 life when a creature enters the battlefield under his opponent’s control.
Philosophy
Triggered abilities are common and invisible, so players should not be harshly penalized when forgetting about one. Players are expected to remember their own triggers; intentionally ignoring one is considered Cheating — Fraud. However, remembering triggers that benefit you is a skill. Therefore, players are not required to point out missed triggers that they do not control, though they may do so if they wish.
The controller of the missed trigger only receives a Warning if the triggered ability is generally considered detrimental for the controlling player. The current game state is not a factor in determining this. Whether a Warning is issued or not does not affect how the trigger is handled, and Failure to Maintain Game State penalties are never issued to players who did not control the ability.

Judges should not intervene in a missed trigger situation unless they intend to issue a Warning or have reason to suspect that the controller is intentionally missing his or her triggers.

Additional Remedy
If the trigger specifies a default action associated with a choice made by the controller of the trigger (usually "If you
don't ..." or "... unless"), resolve the default action immediately without using the stack. If there are unresolved spells
or abilities that are no longer legal as a result of this action, rewind the game to remove all such spells or abilities.
Resulting triggers generated by the action still trigger and resolve as normal.
If the duration of the effect generated by the trigger has already expired, or the trigger was missed more than a turn
ago, instruct the players to continue playing.
Otherwise, the opponent may choose to have the controller play the triggered ability. If they do, insert the forgotten
ability at the appropriate place or on the bottom of the stack. No player may make choices involving objects that
were not in the zone or zones referenced by the trigger when the ability should have triggered. For example, if the
ability instructs a player to sacrifice a creature, that player can't sacrifice a creature that wasn't on the battlefield
when the ability should have triggered.

Underlined for emphasis

[Zolek]

Hypothetical question related to this. To what degree is the person with tabernacle required to make their opponent aware it is in play?

The card has no cost and doesn't use the the stack to enter play so it can appear pretty sneakily...

[Tammit67]

Hypothetical question related to this. To what degree is the person with tabernacle required to make their opponent aware it is in play?

The card has no cost and doesn't use the the stack to enter play so it can appear pretty sneakily...

You should be aware of what land enters play each turn. I personally try to verbalize 'Land for turn' so there is no confusion when I cast Ad nauseum about whether I can play a land or not. When it comes to judging an event, if I was called to a table where the active player missed a trigger on Tabernacle he did not know was in play, I would sympathize with him, but beyond demonstrating his opponent went out of his way to hide the land coming into play or being in play, I don't know if I could do much more for him. I am, however, only a level 1, and perhaps someone with more experience/authority would let the game be rewound to the trigger if caught asap (although I highly doubt it)

[sdematt]

I'm pretty sure at a regular level event though, the trigger would go on the stack if you'd forgotten it and then you would choose to pay or not, at least that's my understanding.

-Matt

[Tammit67]

I'm pretty sure at a regular level event though, the trigger would go on the stack if you'd forgotten it and then you would choose to pay or not, at least that's my understanding.

-Matt

People aren't really allowed to forget triggers at regular, so yes.

[Valtrix]

Regardless, it's not really unfair that you lose a creature if you forget because you have a lot of ways to help you remember anyway. You can take a land and put it with your creature, saying that it's a shortcut to paying the upkeep every turn or you could put a counter/dice/whatever on top of your deck to prevent you from drawing and skipping your upkeep. You can do all this right when they play Tabernacle so that you never forget it's in play. It's not your opponent's job to tell you how to manage all your triggers both from a gameplay perspective (if you make mistakes/forget things, your opponent should get an advantage), and also from the rules perspective (literally, since it's a tournament rule).

[Phoenix Ignition]

Regardless, it's not really unfair that you lose a creature if you forget because you have a lot of ways to help you remember anyway. You can take a land and put it with your creature, saying that it's a shortcut to paying the upkeep every turn
You cannot do this. You cannot "mix zones," by putting anything (like a land) with any other thing (like a creature).


or you could put a counter/dice/whatever on top of your deck to prevent you from drawing and skipping your upkeep.

This is fine, except "whatever" cannot be a card.

[Valtrix]

You cannot do this. You cannot "mix zones," by putting anything (like a land) with any other thing (like a creature).

Show me the rules then, since I have seen the Tabernacle shortcut I mentioned used in tournaments quite a bit. I don't believe what you say is true, as long as the way why you arrange your board is clear. For example, I don't think any judge would tell you that you couldn't put something like an Obelisk of Naya in the area you keep your lands simply because it's an artifact.

[Phoenix Ignition]

Show me the rules then, since I have seen the Tabernacle shortcut I mentioned used in tournaments quite a bit. I don't believe what you say is true, as long as the way why you arrange your board is clear. For example, I don't think any judge would tell you that you couldn't put something like an Obelisk of Naya in the area you keep your lands simply because it's an artifact.

I believe my phrasing is poor. This is the rule to which I refer:


400.5. The order of objects in a library, in a graveyard, or on the stack can't be changed except when effects or rules allow it. The same is true for objects arranged in face-down piles in other zones. Other objects in other zones can be arranged however their owners wish, although who controls those objects, whether they're tapped or flipped, and what other objects are attached to them must remain clear to all players.

You can't lump a land under a creature (which is what I believe you to be referring to) to remember to pay a cost for that creature, as you need to keep them separate. Putting a land underneath the creature is too similar to "attaching" a land to a creature, which is a different thing entirely (although I don't know if it's even possible or not to turn a land into an Aura or Equipment and then attach it to a creature).

Also, if you don't physically untap the land during untap and then tap it during the upkeep to pay for the cost, just putting the land by the creature doesn't help you at all. Considering how that is true, lumping them near each other doesn't help at all since it doesn't prevent the death of your Progenitus if you just skim through your phases.

[lochlan]

Show me the rules then, since I have seen the Tabernacle shortcut I mentioned used in tournaments quite a bit.

I once played against a level 2 judge who used a similar upkeep shortcut. As long as the shortcut is mutually understood it's OK.

From the comprehensive rules:

716.1. When playing a game, players typically make use of mutually understood shortcuts rather than explicitly identifying each game choice (either taking an action or passing priority) a player makes.

716.1a The rules for taking shortcuts are largely unformalized. As long as each player in the game understands the intent of each other player, any shortcut system they use is acceptable

[Koby]

You most certainly can lump lands with creatures on the battlefield. Zones are explicitly:

Hand
Graveyard
Library
Battlefield
Exile
Stack
Sideboard (quasi zone)
Command

How you order your cards in the Battlefield is mostly irrelevant, provided you don't obscure cards for the purpose of Cheating, Fraud, or Misrepresentation of Game Materials/State.

An acceptible tournament shortcut would be to stagger the land on top the creature. Keeping it tapped through your unkeep and acknowledge paying for Tabernacle triggers, usually by pointing to the land or creature. Shortcuts are meant to remove the more mechanic aspects of game play to aid or improve the flow of the game. Forcing players to untap their lands then tap them for Tabernacle is silly and unnecessary. This assumes proper communication between players. All that gets thrown out if there's poor communication.

[Phoenix Ignition]

Good to know, guess I was mistaken. I guess there are an amount of "fair play" style rules like this that I probably look at more stringently than most. Not that I'm a judge or am a dick to my opponents, so it largely doesn't matter, but I guess I could be saving some time on this.