Is using the JEDI Mind trick to win against the rules?

[Janos_Wuryon]

So as the story goes I am playing in round 5 of the NYS champs this year and the following occurs. My opponent, obviously a bit nervous about being down 0-1 in our match decides to play Summoner's pact to fetch a Timbermare and reduce me to 1 life. At this point I had done zero damage and if he topped decked anything relevent( which was everything from a forest to a haste creature) out of his monogreen haste deck I was going to lose. I untapped and drew nothing relevant. Looking at the board I realize Im screwed. I then notice that he had placed the Pact in his yard with another spell on top and hadn't placed any sort of marker to remind him of the upkeep. Given this and his agitated state I take the only play available, the Mind trick.
I quickly found and pointed out to my opponent that I beleived he had the game won. I told him exactly how to win the game on the next turn, regardless of his draw and commented on my mistakes that game and then seeing him agreeing to what I had said told him to untap draw and swing for the win. He was so distracted by his inevitable victory that he untapped and drew his card for the turn, all the while discussing his victory in game 2. Obviouisly as soon as he drew it was a loss for him.
So the point of this tale is to get the communities opinion, is this legal, moral and acceptable behgavior on my part. Is using guile and distraction an acceptable way to win??

[WiLdFiRe]

Dude, that's fine - it's part of magic. I try to use it all the time, it's simply outplaying your opponent.

[DeathwingZERO]

While in my personal opinion I believe it's fully low-ball to do something like that, it was his fault for not giving himself a reminder of the upkeep cost. At the very least, move the card in the graveyard at an angle so he would notice it when he drew.

It's instances like this that I appreciate MTGO does all the triggers and such for you, that way you don't get caught up in ploys like this.

[The Wes]

I agree, while it was mean of you, he should have remembered. Part of this game is bluffing and confusing your opponent. He should have done somethign to remind himself.

[Janos_Wuryon]

I have go to comment on what Deathwing said. You are glad for MTGO and the fact it wont let you forget such costs? I actually think that is one of the downsides to it. To improve as a player you need to remember these things on your own and being coddled through the turn actually makes you a worse player. just an opinion

[willo]

Great move, in a large tournament. If it was more casual play, I would say otherwise, but being states, it was a legal way to win. Your opponent should have known better.

[troopatroop]

Some of the best Jedi Mind Tricks i've ever seen have stemmed from the most dirty mcfilthy plays ever, Like Sideboarding out all your win conditions in a "play it through" combo deck. People scoop when they can't lose far too often, but it's part of the game. The most satisfying games ever were where you outplayed your opponent with your words alone, or sleight of hand.

[DeathwingZERO]

I have go to comment on what Deathwing said. You are glad for MTGO and the fact it wont let you forget such costs? I actually think that is one of the downsides to it. To improve as a player you need to remember these things on your own and being coddled through the turn actually makes you a worse player. just an opinion

It's not the fact that it reminds you that I appreciate it (in fact it's one of the things I hate about MTGO the most, constantly having to remind the game to auto yield to abilities I want nothing to do with), it's that it completely nullifies lowball tactics to win when you've obviously got the severely lower hand.

You asked on a question of morals, and while it was his fault for forgetting, as a person I see that as the same type of tactic that the player here in Portland got DQ'd for by telling his opponent he still had to pay for the Pact and allowed him to scoop, claiming the win. Yours wasn't anywhere near as illegal, but just the same, very underhanded.

But again, like I had said, it was completely his fault. A better player would have completely ignored anything you had to say, as anything from the opponents mouth other than "Ok" for passing priorities or "I concede" means absolutely nothing to me.

Just for the record, let me clarify what stood out the most: You specifically said "Untap, draw, and swing into the win". This is where it's an issue of sportsmanship in my opinion, as you said it specifically in hopes he'd adhere to your exact wording, and completely forget an upkeep existed. Again, something a player that's playing things that trigger on said upkeep, and had JUST played it, really should have noticed though. So ya, I'd say congrats on the win, but I'd hardly look forward to ever playing you myself ;p

[Finn]

I'm on this train.
Great move, in a large tournament. If it was more casual play, I would say otherwise, but being states, it was a legal way to win. Your opponent should have known better.Honestly, in the local tournaments where I know pretty much all of the opponents personally, I would remind the other player simply because I do not want crap like this to make me think my deck is better than it actually is. But in the last big tournament I was in, I bluffed an opponent into emptying his hand so I could Funeral Charm his last card (Haunting Echoes) with his Dark Ritual on the stack. That shit had me feeling high for the rest of the day.

So hell yeah, it's ok. Wizards purposely changed the rules of the game regarding moving cards as reminders for just this reason. He just did not take advantage of that. And besides, this game would suck balls if wilier players were not encouraged to outwit lesser ones in whatever way they can.

[Janos_Wuryon]

Wait lets be clear here. It wasnt some sketchy 10year old kid. It was an adult magic player, who I have seen at more than a few tournaments. Aa far as it being lo ball and semi illegal I never misrepresented anything. I didnt lie about any public information and as far as verbally leading my opponent it is no different then telling someone true information about the game state in order to walk them into a trick. PLenty of times I have mentioned to a player that their creature swinging is an issue when you know you have a trick to deal with it. All the information is factual and I dont think its lo-ball at all, unless you blatantly lie or decieve about public information.

[DeathwingZERO]

Well, that's a difference of opinion on what's considered low ball vs what's obviously illegal. Your tactic was completely legal, and there's no real issue with it in terms of game play. I personally wouldn't fall for it, because I make sure anytime I have anything that needs to remind me something, that I make it very obvious I should remind myself.

But at the same time, I personally wouldn't ever use verbal tactics to coerce an action or lack of one, I just let them walk into mistakes on their own. Call it a code of honor, I want to win for being the better player, not the better talker.

[Bryant Cook]

That was fair game, I've had people try and do some scummy things. This hasn't even come close to the line.

[Janos_Wuryon]

well how is avoiding walking into a cleverly planned but unspoken trick different than a verball one. If I leave my board in a state that makes you think I cant play or dont have certain tricks( Ie tapping a potential blocker to swing then blinking it to be uintapped) different from verbally drawing my opponent into a play mistake? Also have you ever let an opponent make a play mistake that you kknew was bad. Is it low ball to not tell him that his Swords will fizzle cause you can make your guy pro white? I dont think it is but if players start taking issue with being allowed to make mistakes then wher does the coddling stop

[TeenieBopper]

Fuck all this "that's mean" or "that's lowball" shit. He fucked up. I'd be willing to bet I've won just as many, if not more games from my opponent being a shitty player than me being a decent one.

[Bryant Cook]

Fuck all this "that's mean" or "that's lowball" shit. He fucked up. I'd be willing to bet I've won just as many, if not more games from my opponent being a shitty player than me being a decent one.

Agreed.

[hi-val]

I'm interested to see a judge chime in. We're talking as players, but I haven't seen Comp Rules cited. I'm unaware of the rules right now; for some things, if a player notices a problem and doesn't say anything, they can get dinged too. I know mandatory things like naming what Pithing Needle gets falls under that, but I wonder about Pacts and other voluntary triggers. I think the intention of the rules is to protect against players who see mistakes and don't say anything to try and gain an advantage.

[DeathwingZERO]

Implying that you have a lesser hand or board position is nothing like saying "Hey, you've got the win, just do this and this and this, and your good to go". You had even stated you told him what to do on his turn, but failed to mention he should also remember to pay for his Pact.

Your hand and deck are unknowns for a reason, the game has it's elements of secrecy, and surprise. Not knowing what your going to play means he needs to be prepared for a possible lure. However, taking the time out to talk with them about play mistakes, how the game is so one sided, and that they should "just hurry and win" isn't anywhere near the same trick.

My question is, why would you bother actually talking to him about your play mistakes, about how he's got the win, and all that other literally useless information, for anything BUT trying to get him to forget something? Why open your mouth at all, if the win for him is so obvious?

And let's also take that a step further, would you have done the same thing had they visibly shown something as a reminder for that payment? Chances are, you wouldn't.

I'd also like to ask a judge about this particular instance. The wording of the Pacts in particular makes me believe they are a triggered ability. Wouldn't this mean that both players would have to actively pass priority in order for it to resolve, AND then also pass priority on the lack of paying for said ability? It would seem that the game itself (especially with MTGO's automatic-triggering) does not allow for the game to continue if a trigger is "forgotten", or that it should be allowed to go back to it, as it's a recoverable game state. Am I right or wrong in believing this?

[freakish777]

In a tournament setting I see nothing wrong with this. In a casual game, I obviously am going to play differently.

As far as "verbally leading your opponent down a path" goes... see Terry Soh's article on bluffing (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/feature/389) and then watch the video he mentions. Its T8 coverage of a limited PT in which he's playing Karsten and declares his life total to be 1 point higher than it is (which Frank catches immediately and corrects him on), feigning having made a mistake with pencil and paper, and thus making the wrong play allowing Frank to attack with everything for the win. Frank gobbles it up, swings with enough guys to put Terry to zero, and of course Terry has an arcane spell to go with his Thief of Hope, allowing him to send back across the red zone for lethal.

[DeathwingZERO]

In a tournament setting I see nothing wrong with this. In a casual game, I obviously am going to play differently.

As far as "verbally leading your opponent down a path" goes... see Terry Soh's article on bluffing (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/feature/389) and then watch the video he mentions. Its T8 coverage of a limited PT in which he's playing Karsten and declares his life total to be 1 point higher than it is (which Frank catches immediately and corrects him on), feigning having made a mistake with pencil and paper, and thus making the wrong play allowing Frank to attack with everything for the win. Frank gobbles it up, swings with enough guys to put Terry to zero, and of course Terry has an arcane spell to go with his Thief of Hope, allowing him to send back across the red zone for lethal.

The problem is, this isn't leading them down a path. This is arbitrarily doing as much as possible to make them forget a crucial phase which will cause them a game loss. In a tournament setting, both players have to acknowledge a mandatory trigger and a step into a new phase, even though most of the time it's done in the opposite, when the player is verbal about staying in said phase.

[Volt]

I come down on the "It's cheesy but legal" side of the fence.

Personally, I don't think you should be allowed to talk to your opponent during the game, except to announce your plays or relay information about the game-state. However, that's not in the rules.

[Van Phanel]

Personally, I don't think you should be allowed to talk to your opponent during the game, except to announce your plays or relay information about the game-state. However, that's not in the rules.

Wait. What?!?

Are you serious?

I at least am playing magic to meet other people, talk and joke with them and just have fun all the while getting to play a game which is great fun and happens to be my favorite. I guess for most other people it's about the same.

@Topic: Your play is legal and if it was on some big tournament I'd congratulate you for tricking your opponent. It wouldn't even say it's bad behaviour, your opponent has no particular reason for believing you.

[TeenieBopper]

You know, poker players get congratulated when they bluff garbage and make someone lay down the damn near nuts. Why the hell isn't he same thing happening here?

[DeathwingZERO]

You know, poker players get congratulated when they bluff garbage and make someone lay down the damn near nuts. Why the hell isn't he same thing happening here?

Because here we're talking about an actual game state being completely skipped, he knowingly allowed his opponent to pass on the Pact, and go directly to the draw step, resulting in a loss.

The question is, whether or not that can even happen in the first place. Let me reiterate, this is NOT A BLUFF TACTIC. He literally just tossed in extra information to cloud the opponents judgment, then proceeds to also pass up the Upkeep Step and go straight to the draw step, KNOWING his opponent had a trigger that was supposed to happen, he FULLY ADMITTED THAT WAS HIS DESIRED EFFECT.

In other words, he knowingly skipped a mandatory portion of the turn, which his opponent forgot. Neglecting to pay for the upkeep is one thing, but never getting past the priority of the trigger in the first place, then going straight into a draw step is another.

Personally, it won't surprise me if the Pact player gets a game loss anyways, just because he failed to put in a reminder. But when his opponent had opened this thread stating he did it to intentionally attempt to make his opponent skip it's trigger in my book is subject to being DQ'd for borderline cheating. It may not be the case, but we still haven't gotten any official word from a judge around here as to whether or not this is even a legal, as it's a mandatory delayed trigger ability.

EDIT: The only thing I can even consider worthwhile here is that the triggered ability was overlooked by both players (intentionally or not). The question is, whether or not this is considered an illegal action. From what I read in 422.1 of the CRB, if it is, then they just rewind from the draw to the trigger, and the player may go from there. So it looks like if the player wanted to argue this, there's a possibility that he'd still get to respond to the trigger, even if he forgot it. I haven't found anything else in the rulebook or floor rules yet dealing with this type of problem.

[TeenieBopper]

Have you ever watched Daniel Negraneau play? This is all he does. He talks out loud about what he's putting his opponent on, and what he's holding. This really is no different. He mind tricked his opponent. His opponent fell for it. I fail to see how this is illegal, or even immoral. Magic is a game of information, just like poker is, and as far as I'm concerned, manipulating that information, without misrepresenting it, is a perfectly fine strategy.

Once upon a time, if you drew a card without paying Masticore's upkeep, you were forced to sacrifice him. Of course, once upon a time, you were punished for shitty play, too. With the recent trends as of late, I wouldn't be surprised if this is no longer the case.

[DeathwingZERO]

I was trying to edit my last post after finding this, but for some reason it's just not finishing the edit. So I'm just going to post this seperate.

Well, a quick glance at Starcitygames revealed this:

"Q: If my opponent plays a Pact of Negation, am I required to remind him to pay it during his next upkeep? I notice it does not say "You may pay 3UU", so as I understand it, he is required to pay the cost if he is capable. So, if I do not remind him, and he does not pay the cost, would I receive any kind of penalty such as a warning or higher? Or will he simply lose the game and that is the end of it?

A: You are under no obligation to point out that your opponent has a Pact delayed triggered ability that is about to resolve. While it is very sporting to remind your opponent that he must pay or lose, you are not required to in any way. Also, your opponent is only forced to pay the cost if he has that mana in his mana pool. He is not forced to tap his lands for mana or generate mana in any way. If your opponent forgets about the trigger and fails to pay it, you have an obligation to point out his mistake, since he has made an illegal play, but you do not need to do this until it is obvious (based on him taking actions that occur later in the game, like drawing for his turn) that he has forgotten to resolve the trigger. At this point he should not, under the current rules, be allowed to retroactively pay for the trigger, and he should lose the game."

Personally, I find that ruling to be dumb. It says that it's very sporting to remind your opponent, yet you can deny them of that knowledge (because they don't ask), and it's not considered lying on your part to allow them to skip the trigger, creating an illegal action, and causing them to forfeit. Why would this be different than any other illegal action covered in the comprehensive rulebooks, that allows the player to go back to the trigger and choose whether or not to pay for it? For those interested, here's the rulebook wording:

"422. Handling Illegal Actions

422.1. If a player realizes that he or she can’t legally take an action after starting to do so, the entire action is reversed and any payments already made are canceled. No abilities trigger and no effects apply as a result of an undone action. If the action was playing a spell, the spell returns to the zone it came from. The player may also reverse any legal mana abilities played while making the illegal play, unless mana from them or from any triggered mana abilities they triggered was spent on another mana ability that wasn’t reversed. Players may not reverse actions that moved cards to a library or from a library to any zone other than the stack.

422.2. When reversing illegal spells and abilities, the player who had priority retains it and may take another action or pass. The player may redo the reversed action in a legal way or take any other action allowed by the rules."

So I don't get it. If failing to adhere to a triggered ability and going into the draw step is considered an illegal action (as the judge from SCG wrote), then why are you not able to reverse the game state to go back to the trigger and resolve it as it should be done? Am I the only one that thinks this particular answer to a very obviously written rule seems to quite heavily contradict the rule itself? Where is it in the "current rules" that is says the game cannot be reversed due to an illegal action? The portion of the rulebook I quoted from is the only place in the entire thing that deals with illegal plays and resolving/repairing them.

[TeenieBopper]

1. You are not denying them information. It's publicly available. Shit, they played the damn spell, they should know what the fuck they're doing.

2. Drawing your card creates an irreversible game state.

[DeathwingZERO]

Have you ever watched Daniel Negraneau play? This is all he does. He talks out loud about what he's putting his opponent on, and what he's holding. This really is no different. He mind tricked his opponent. His opponent fell for it. I fail to see how this is illegal, or even immoral. Magic is a game of information, just like poker is, and as far as I'm concerned, manipulating that information, without misrepresenting it, is a perfectly fine strategy.

Once upon a time, if you drew a card without paying Masticore's upkeep, you were forced to sacrifice him. Of course, once upon a time, you were punished for shitty play, too. With the recent trends as of late, I wouldn't be surprised if this is no longer the case.

You cannot compare poker to magic in any regards to this instance. It's not a bluff, it's an intentional acceptance of an illegal play on the players part. Had this been a case of "I totally bluffed him out and made him think attacking me was a good idea, and I just nuked his creature" that'd totally be fine. But it's not the case.

From the viewpoint of the comprehensive rulebook, there should have never been any of those "Once upon a time" instances. If you fail to pay for a cost that has an effect, and go into attempting to draw because your opponent didn't say anything about it, you created an illegal play. Yet an illegal play is accepted to be reversed, especially if it's a simple thing, as this case should be.

Forgetting to do something is a sign of a bad player. I have admitted that time and time again. But this is a case of a forgetful play that is required to happen, doesn't (to the Pact players knowledge), and then goes onto another step, causing a loss. That really shouldn't be the case. If our online version of the game requires all triggers to actually trigger, then what's the problem if the trigger JUST resolved in a real game, and it's one that would cause the game to no longer continue?

EDIT: Could you link me to anything that says a draw creates an irreversible game state? That's basically exactly the information I'm looking for, it would completely prove this situation resolves as the judge says.

[TeenieBopper]

It's common sense. You draw your card, you see your card, you know what that card is. You can't simply put it back on top and "forget" what card it was, and play as if you don't have that knowledge.

[DeathwingZERO]

Well, it's also common sense that a good player would stop the player from drawing, and let them in on the fact that they are dead, citing the illegal play. It really shouldn't ever make it to the draw step, and if it does, then I could see the need for a game loss.

EDIT: Even in the case that the game loss is 100% certain, I still think it's a dick move. Even the judge says you aren't obligated, but it's in good sportsmanship to remind them. Since when did this game lose all respect for that term, to the point that players will willingly scoop to this style of play to intentionally cause losses?

I say take your ass whooping like a man, and help the player rather than punish them for their mistakes. I've actually reminded players of things similar to this fully knowing I would lose, because it's being a respectful player. Competitions bring out the worst in people, though.

[TeenieBopper]

Well, it's also common sense that a good player would stop the player from drawing, and let them in on the fact that they are dead, citing the illegal play. It really shouldn't ever make it to the draw step, and if it does, then I could see the need for a game loss.

Fuck that. A sympathetic player would stop the other player from drawing. A good player is going to take his win and smile.


If a player realizes that he or she can’t legally take an action after starting to do so, the entire action is reversed and any payments already made are canceled.

A player is responsible only for knowing his illegal actions. I have no responsibility whatsoever to ensure that he plays legally, other than collecting my win.

[Bryant Cook]

Fuck that. A sympathetic player would stop the other player from drawing. A good player is going to take his win and smile.

Mike, you know how we hate agreeing with each other? I can't help it this time. You couldn't be more right. Play to win or GTFU.

[DeathwingZERO]

Spoken like a true Bob Maher Jr. "Greatness at any cost". It's no wonder competitive sports of all kinds are nothing more than the money now.

[Nightmare]

You're both misusing the word "Legal." It's perfectly legal to not pay the upkeep on a Pact. It's legal to not tell them they are forgetting. The reason it is not disallowwed, is specifically because there is nothing illegal about it.

I hate to be the guy that says this, but if you're in it to make sure your opponent likes you, rather than to win, then why waste your entry fee?

[Lego]

EDIT: Could you link me to anything that says a draw creates an irreversible game state? That's basically exactly the information I'm looking for, it would completely prove this situation resolves as the judge says.


It's common sense. You draw your card, you see your card, you know what that card is. You can't simply put it back on top and "forget" what card it was, and play as if you don't have that knowledge.

It's not just common sense, it's actually written into the rules. @DeathwingZero: It's right in the rules that you quoted, read this section again:

Players may not reverse actions that moved cards to a library or from a library to any zone other than the stack.

By drawing a card, you have moved a card from your library to your hand, a zone other than the stack. This is an action that cannot be reversed, so the only other option is to lose the game.

[TeenieBopper]

Someone broke the edit function:

edit: this is not a case of poor sportsmanship. Poor sportsmanship is not accepting condolences for mana screw/bad luck. Bad sportsmanship is not offering or taking a handshake at the end of a match. Bad sportsmanship is cheating. All this is is a case of recognizing that you have an out, and working towards generating that out. I fail to see how doing whatever you can within the rules of the game to win is unsporting. He wasn't withholding information, nor was he misrepresenting things. He set his opponent up, and the opponent took the bait and fell for it. There are more spectacular plays in this game than just the ones made with cardboard.


Spoken like a true Bob Maher Jr. "Greatness at any cost". It's no wonder competitive sports of all kinds are nothing more than the money now.

Since when does playing to win make someone a poor sportsman or bad person? It's a goddamn competition, that's the fucking definition: to win.

I compete in judo and submission grappling. I know when I step on the mat that my opponent is going to do everything in his power- tripping, grabbing his gi, grabbing my gi, forearms across the nose and mouth, bending joints, etc- to get the win. I do the same. I've lost my fair share of times, many of them painfully. You know what I do? I get up, shake his hand, congratulate him (and mean it, too). Then I figure out what I did wrong to get in the position, and make sure I don't do it again.

edit: yeah, I noticed the part about moving cards to and from the library. I just didn't quote it since we moved past it.

[DeathwingZERO]

Ok, that's the spot I completely missed. Thanks for the clarification Lego, that's all I needed. Either way, I'd still remind them.

@Nightmare: If I know I'm going to lose, I'm not going to take a win I don't deserve. Call me honor bound, but I want to earn my points. It's not like losing this one game of the match guarantees I'm out of top 8 contention.

[zulander]

If it's a large tournament then I'd let him draw his card, if it's freindly game play I'll remind my opponent. I don't see what the big problem is.


Ok, that's the spot I completely missed. Thanks for the clarification Lego, that's all I needed. Either way, I'd still remind them.

@Nightmare: If I know I'm going to lose, I'm not going to take a win I don't deserve. Call me honor bound, but I want to earn my points. It's not like losing this one game of the match guarantees I'm out of top 8 contention.


But you see, you do deserve to win because your opponent forgot. Having a good recollection of what key cards have been played is a sign of a good player, and if you miss something as key as a card that will lose you the game then how do you deserve to win?

[DeathwingZERO]

Someone broke the edit function:

edit: this is not a case of poor sportsmanship......He set his opponent up, and the opponent took the bait and fell for it. There are more spectacular plays in this game than just the ones made with cardboard.



Since when does playing to win make someone a poor sportsman or bad person? It's a goddamn competition, that's the fucking definition: to win.

I compete in judo and submission grappling. I know when I step on the mat that my opponent is going to do everything in his power- tripping, grabbing his gi, grabbing my gi, forearms across the nose and mouth, bending joints, etc- to get the win. I do the same. I've lost my fair share of times, many of them painfully. You know what I do? I get up, shake his hand, congratulate him (and mean it, too). Then I figure out what I did wrong to get in the position, and make sure I don't do it again.

edit: yeah, I noticed the part about moving cards to and from the library. I just didn't quote it since we moved past it.

As I'm not alone, the judge also said it's in poor sportsmanship to not remind them of something. So while you might think I'm alone in this case, the people that watch over your games seem to believe not.

And as far as the competitive portion goes, just because dirty tactics exist doesn't make them acceptable. Your quote about the martial arts is commendable, but hardly relevant. In a more realistic comparison, it'd be more like you had him in a choke/pressure hold, saw that he wasn't breathing/responding, and continued with it until the judge calls it.

In any case, I'm sure the player learned from his mistake, and I'm certain he's not going to listen to a word any opponent says to him in future games, short of things relevant to the actions taken. So I guess as all is done and dealt with, there's really no more reason to argue ethics/sportsmanship to winning.

[TeenieBopper]

/shrug.

I figure if it's not illegal, then it's not immoral either.

And for what it's worth (better or worse) I would maintain the hold until the judge calls it, unless he's actually unconcious. I'm a stone cold bastard, but I'm not actually going to kill a guy.

[Nightmare]

@Nightmare: If I know I'm going to lose, I'm not going to take a win I don't deserve. Call me honor bound, but I want to earn my points. It's not like losing this one game of the match guarantees I'm out of top 8 contention.What's the downside of attempting to trick him into losing in an unwinnable scenario? If it doesn't work, you still lose. I'd say if you can make him lose to himself, you deserve the win.

The only difference between this example, and destroying every land and countering every spell, is semantics.

[HdH_Cthulhu]

different story:

in my last seald tournament, on the final tabel, we got into the lategame both with many dudes on the board and 7- 9 lands.
He had 2 island walkers and i splashed blue in my deck. I played some blue spells from my nonbasic lands but i had a island and i hide it under some forests and plains...

was that cheating?

[DeathwingZERO]

Whoa, you "hid" it? If the cards on your side of the board are stacked in any way that they can't see the title of the card at the very least, it's obviously cheating, as it falls under denying your opponent information.

I've actually seen times when people got warned just how the lands were stacked after tapped for mana, because you can't see all of them.

[TeenieBopper]

yeah, I'm actually going to have to side with DWZ on this one. That's really pushing the envelope for "misrepresentation" and the fact that you did it intentionally really makes it so.

As a general rule of thumb, never stack your lands into one big pile. Make sure they're all visible.

[Zuriya]

Wouldn't the player with the Summoner's Pact tap the lands afterwards anyway?
How are you going to prove that you are not making a dick out of yourself to win an unwinnable game ? While I am a peaceful person, I wouldn't mind if this guy punched you in the face if you win with this.
There is a reason that Casual is fun (and more challenging (at least 2hg) ).

[kirdape3]

You guys know Kenji Tsumura, right? The commonly described 'best player in the world'? He's openly admitted stopping people in their upkeep when they were about to miss Pact triggers. Is it illegal to let them miss a Pact trigger? Absolutely not. Do you HAVE to remind them? No, since it's an optional action (they don't HAVE to pay the upkeep).

And yes, hiding the land is misrepresenting the game state, and would've been cheating if the judge had been called.

[Volt]

You can bet that I will gladly take the win if my opponent forgets to pay for his Pact. I may even sit there silently wishing for him to forget. What I will not do is go out of my way to distract the guy and try to force him to to forget. That just strikes me as undignified. I'm not saying it's illegal. Obviously, it isn't. I'm just saying that's where I draw the line. I don't want to win that badly at a game of Magic.

Hopefully, the guy who lost will take this lesson to heart. Always put something on top of your deck to remind yourself of upkeep costs and effects.

[Lego]

different story:

in my last seald tournament, on the final tabel, we got into the lategame both with many dudes on the board and 7- 9 lands.
He had 2 island walkers and i splashed blue in my deck. I played some blue spells from my nonbasic lands but i had a island and i hide it under some forests and plains...

was that cheating?

Yes. That's either a Procedural Error- Misrepresentation if you didn't mean to do it, or Cheating if you did mean to do it. You either get a Warning or DQ without prize depending on whether the judge thinks you meant to do it.

[troopatroop]

The best trick was when LAM was in final turns with Angel_Of_Despair, and he said "Go" during her mainphase when she was confused about something and not paying attention. She drew her card and should have been DQed.

Awesome. I think judges should call shit like that. If you're that much more mentally in the game than your opponent, and that this game is like a war anyways, so them dropping their guard to you like that should lose it for them.

[hi-val]

You guys know Kenji Tsumura, right? The commonly described 'best player in the world'? He's openly admitted stopping people in their upkeep when they were about to miss Pact triggers. Is it illegal to let them miss a Pact trigger? Absolutely not. Do you HAVE to remind them? No, since it's an optional action (they don't HAVE to pay the upkeep).

And yes, hiding the land is misrepresenting the game state, and would've been cheating if the judge had been called.

That's how I try to operate. If you remind your opponent about a Pact trigger, I think that says that you feel you're a good enough player to win how you were planning to. Not sure that the converse is true about only bad players let these things through, etc., but I think it's an ubermensch move to remind someone of their pact trigger and then proceed to win anyway. Good on Kenji!

Also, three pages and nobody has posted Sirlin's Playing To Win? Well, I'm not gonna be the one to do it then... : )

[frogboy]

You asked on a question of morals, and while it was his fault for forgetting, as a person I see that as the same type of tactic that the player here in Portland got DQ'd for by telling his opponent he still had to pay for the Pact and allowed him to scoop, claiming the win.

Are you talking about when Buker got confused as to what happened if a Pact was countered, called a judge, and his opponent just stone conceded on the spot? Or did something else happen? Because Buker wasn't DQ'd.

Re: shenanigans: amatuerish* but legal. Totally standard in tournaments where the prizes matter to you.

You don't have to explicitly pass priority on the Pact trigger for the same reason you don't have to explicitly pass priority on something like a Phyrexian Arena. You only have to explicitly retain priority when you actually want to do something.

*in the sense that you could've been much more adroit about how you went about it.

[cdr]

I suggest everyone read the recent Player Communication Guide (http://yawgatog.com/resources/pg-changes/2007-06-20-2007-09-20/?id=5) (PG Section 50) and Player Communication Guide DVD Commentary (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=judge/article/20070911a). They were created to help clear up these kind of questions. Also see Section 123 in the Game Play Errors DVD Commentary (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=judge/article/20070316a).


The Golden Rule of Player Communication: Statements made about the game being played must be truthful (to the best of their knowledge). However, statements do not need to be exhaustive – honest answers with careful omissions or "non-answers" designed to misdirect opponents into making suboptimal - but not illegal - plays are acceptable.

Failing to remind your opponent of a trigger that doesn't target before he misses it is peachy. Do point it out immediately afterwards.

Attempting to physically hide public game information is Cheating.

[Zuriya]

Why would anyone ever not pay the Upkeep costs of a Pact (Platinum Angel and other stuff aside) ?
Either the wording of the Pacts is stupid or people should be be notified that such a trigger is on the stack (faulty rulings). Comparing a Pact trigger with an Underworld Dreams or a Masticore trigger should not be done. No harm is done by reversing the game state. If people are allowed to change how they tap their mana, this should be allowed 100%.

As to the hiding of Islands, well meh. If the play area is narrow, different types of cards are stacked. That's common.

Edit: Sorry for the wrong statement :)

[boris13]

A lot of people would have probaly done the same thing and who knows maybe the guy would have forgotten about the pact anyways. It's not the most honest way to win, but there are worse. He also is not the first person to use the mind trick in history. Talking to your opponet was never cheating in the first place.


To the guy hiding the lands thats pretty dumb.

[frogboy]

Why would anyone ever not pay the Upkeep costs of a Pact (Platinum Angel and other stuff aside) ?
Either the wording of the Pacts is stupid or people should be be notified that such a trigger is on the stack (faulty rulings). Comparing a Pact trigger with an Underworld Dreams or a Masticore trigger should not be done. No harm is done by reversing the game state. If people are allowed to change how they tap their mana, this should be allowed 100%.

As to the hiding of Islands, well meh. If the play area is narrow, different types of cards are stacked. That's common.

1. Pact triggers in the same fashion as every other upkeep trigger.

2. Drawing a card makes the game state irreversible.

3. Deliberately hiding your islands and blocking islandwalkers is 100% cheating.

[Nihil Credo]

Also, your opponent is only forced to pay the cost if he has that mana in his mana pool. He is not forced to tap his lands for mana or generate mana in any way.

This makes me wonder about a weird scenario: what if a player forgets about Pact of the Titan's trigger while he has a Braid of Fire with 5+ age counters in play? Or Summoner's Pact's trigger while he has 4x Sakura-Tribe Springcallers in play?

On the one side, if he has the mana in the mana pool, he is forced to pay for the Pact and does not have the option to lose the game. On the other, in order to have the mana in the mana pool, he needs to state that he puts the Braids/Springcaller triggers on the stack above the Pact trigger (even though they are mana triggered abilities, they do not trigger from playing a mana ability, so they use the stack). But unlike with Masticore and such, there is no "default" choice for how you stack your triggers at the beginning of a step.

The Penalty Guide says about missed trigger (the penalty for which is a Warning at all RELs, btw):


If the trigger requires a choice that does not have a default action or a trigger with no choice will have an effect on
the visual representation of the game, and the error is caught within the scope of a turn cycle (see below for definition), resolve the forgotten ability using game-specific timing rules. For example, in a Magic game, the
forgotten ability would be placed on the stack. The player may not make choices involving objects that were not in the zone or zones referenced by the trigger when the ability triggered. If the error is caused partway through an action (such as choosing blockers in Magic, or a shift in Dreamblade), back up to the beginning of that action. If the error is discovered after a turn cycle, continue the game without resolving the forgotten trigger.

Note that the Penalty Guides (which apply to non-MtG games as well) define "triggers" as "actions that the game asks players to take as a result an event occurring".
Therefore, I'd say that "choose the order of your triggered abilities on the stack" does fall under the above definition, and Braid of Fire does indeed save you from forgetting a Pact of the Titan. Cool.

[Zuriya]

Edit: Deleted wrong statements.

Ok he does gain information.
But as said above (Deathwing), the player should be informed of the trigger action immediately after it resolves so the game state can be reversed. And knowingly not telling should be a warning or whatever.

That would be an ideal ruling.
(That doesn't exclude a game loss for the Pact player)

[etrigan]

Originally Posted by Ruling
Also, your opponent is only forced to pay the cost if he has that mana in his mana pool. He is not forced to tap his lands for mana or generate mana in any way.


What? Since when is this accurate? Nothing's ever forced me to pay life to Dystopia.

[Nihil Credo]

Cumulative Upkeep uses the "unless" structure, which means it's optional. The Pacts use a mandatory phrasing - kind of like the old Phyrexian Dreadnought "if you do/if you don't" phrasing.

[Lego]

3. Deliberately hiding your islands and blocking islandwalkers is 100% cheating.

Unless I was misreading, he hid the island so his opponent wouldn't even attack. He didn't actually block anything. Doesn't make it any less illegal though.


But as said above (Deathwing), the player should be informed of the trigger action immediately after it resolves so the game state can be reversed. And knowingly not telling should be a warning or whatever.

The only situation I can think of where this is possible is if your opponent has a Solitary Confinement in play (is there anything else that causes you to skip your Draw Step?) They could then untap, pitch a card, and begin to play spells. You would be required to tell them that the Pact had triggered and they didn't pay it, and you'd have to back up the game state. Otherwise, the way you know that they have skipped the Pact trigger is that they have drawn a card. Once they've drawn a card, it's too late to back up and they lose.

Is there some other situation you're thinking of wherein you could notify the player after they had missed the trigger but before they draw? I suppose if they say, "Untap, go to my Upkeep, Ok to go to my Draw Step?" then you have to tell them, but it's unlikely that they'll do that and miss the Pact trigger. Have fun trying to convince players to remind them about the Pact trigger before the Draw though.

[Bovinious]

In the original situation I think what you did was wrong because you intentionally misled your opponent about the game state. You said that he would win if he untapped, drew, and attacked, which you knew to be false, and I think that constitutes as misrepresenting the game state. If not though its fien but from the description it doesnt sound fine...

[herbig]

Throughout all this discussion, no one has taken the time to stop and ask "What would Herbig do?"

Personally, I would have been sleeping with the man's wife. Upon casually revealing this information, he would have jumped over the table at me, thus securing my win.

I use this tactic rather frequently, breaking a lot of hearts and tables in the process. But that other shit was definitely cheating.

[frogboy]

In the original situation I think what you did was wrong because you intentionally misled your opponent about the game state. You said that he would win if he untapped, drew, and attacked, which you knew to be false, and I think that constitutes as misrepresenting the game state. If not though its fien but from the description it doesnt sound fine...

I'm fairly sure you can lie about future events, but even so, like, come on. If my board is infinite 1/1s and yours is land with no cards in hand, all I have to do is attack you. But wait! What if I attack with only one guy? etc.

cliffs notes: a lot of you people need to clean the sand out of your collective vaginae. (and firefox just taught me the plural of vagina! you learn something new every day.)

[Janos_Wuryon]

OK are we all forgetting the simple fact that any optional trigger that is ignored is under the rules considered to be not paid. If you have a brass man out and you never announce youre paying the mana to untap him then proceed to your main phase you have by youre own innaction made the decision to not pay for his trigger. Same is true for the pacts
also from a logical stand point let me point this out. If a player is told that not taking an optional action would lose him the game would he ever choose to not take that action? If I had to or was supposed to remind my opponent to pay mana or lose the game he would never choose to lose. Thus by youre logic and way of thought the only time wizards R&D expected a player to lose from the playing of a pact was when either A) they played the pact without having the mana sources in play to pay the upkeep ( aint gonna happen) or B) they play a pact and their uber cool opponent drops STONE RAIN FTW. Are you guy's serious??? think about what youre advocating in magic. by youre line of thought you are obligated to remind youre opponent of every may trigger in the game. Oh wait mister you may gain life off of your permanent there would you like to. Oh mister you forgot that your masticore may deal 3 to my man would you like to, hey mister you forgot to pay 1 to untap your brass man so he can block me all day long would you like to?? come on this is just absurd. We have moved past a reasonable discussion on the use of legal persausion to promote sub par plays to a circle jerk of opponent coddling, look If you want to play in a competative environent then be competative in all aspects. cheating by hidding lands, you shoudl get DQ's winning cause youre opponent is a weaker player thats what its all about

[Zuriya]

I hope they print more cards with the Pact trigger so that it becomes a regular win condition.

There may be reasons that you don't want to pay mana or even gain life (Pulse of the Forge).
The wording on the Pacts is just stupid. If it said something like "if you don't pay the costs, you lose the game at end of turn" the player might get an advantage. But this way it's just stupid.
If you can't tell the difference between Brass Man and Pact, i can't help it.

[Janos_Wuryon]

Hey there is no difference. Both are optional triggers that need to be resolved in your upkeep. Neither is compulsory, both are considered to be not paid/said no to if the player ignores the trigger and moves out of his upkeep into another step. Again unless you really believe the intent was to create spells with a drawback that only comes into play in extreme circumstances youre nuts. Its like saying FOW was meant to only cost you a life and a blue card if youre opponent had an arabian nights mountain in play with a squire in hand and its a tuesday???? The drawback is worded as such so that players actually could lose from their ignoring of the upkeep cost. Hence why the reminder rules were changed to allow players to not forget.

[etrigan]

They did change the rules to aloow you to place reminders on/around you deck, just so people wont accidentally no pay for Pacts. If you play Pacts, and dont use the reminders, that's what can happen. Those are the risks you take.

[Raddley]

It would seem that this thread has gotten it's answer. Yes it is entirely legal to Jedi Mind Trick your opponent into the win. Whether it is a moral thing to do can only be answered by the person winning. Everyone has different values and morals, if he can sleep with himself at night then no one else should have a problem with it.

It seemed like he started this thread for everyone to congratulate him on his awesome win. So here you go, ZOMG YOU SO PWND THAT n00b. It was his bad for not having a reminder for the pact. Now can we all just move along and quit beating this dead horse.

[Janos_Wuryon]

first of all I didnt start the thread to hear a series of congrats on my play. I know it was a good play and I got congrats from my play group so I am all set there. I was really interested in the point of view of some very competative players and what has happened is Ive seen almost as many people who profess this desire to lose pleasently then win. I am just shocked at the attitude and the thread has continued due to this surprise

[Volt]

cliffs notes: a lot of you people need to clean the sand out of your collective vaginae. (and firefox just taught me the plural of vagina! you learn something new every day.)

Too bad the pluralization doesn't make sense here. You can only have one collective vagina. :)

[Cabal-kun]

I was really interested in the point of view of some very competative players...


I am just shocked at the attitude

You asked for point of views, and you got them. Don't want to be shocked? Don't ask. It's that simple. :wink:

[Jak]

You asked for point of views, and you got them. Don't want to be shocked? Don't ask. It's that simple. :wink:

How is being shocked bad or anything? It is fine to do a test and be shocked by the results.

[Volt]

I think the point is that he shouldn't be shocked. By asking the question "Is this legal, moral, ethical..." he implies that he recognizes there is a distinction between those terms. The fact that he is "shocked" that a significant percentage of people think his actions were immoral makes me wonder where, if anywhere, he actually draws the line between legality and morality. If he doesn't think there is such a line, then he shouldn't care what other people think, and therefore shouldn't have bothered asking the question, unless of course he's just looking to collect some attaboys (which would be rather pathetic).

[Cait_Sith]

I think the primary answer can be summed up as this:

Nothing illegal was done. Period.

My opinion:

If this was a FNM, the guy was being really churlish. People come to FNMs to have fun and not be under the pressure of higher tournaments. He'd probably find himself very unwelcome at later FNMs at that store.

If this was States, PTQ, PT, Worlds, and so forth, then I see nothing wrong with it, at all. These are higher level tournaments where play to win, first and foremost. If you come not expecting your opponents to pull every single legal trick they can cook up (and some illegal ones too), the you should not be there. If you think that it is wrong, you should not be there. If you don't wish to engage in it, feel free. If you are talented enough to not to have to use deceptions of this caliber to win, feel free and more power to you. Don't expect others to live by your standards.

[Volt]

If this was States, PTQ, PT, Worlds, and so forth, then I see nothing wrong with it, at all. These are higher level tournaments where play to win, first and foremost. If you come not expecting your opponents to pull every single legal trick they can cook up (and some illegal ones too), the you should not be there. If you think that it is wrong, you should not be there. If you don't wish to engage in it, feel free. If you are talented enough to not to have to use deceptions of this caliber to win, feel free and more power to you. Don't expect others to live by your standards.

I don't expect other people to live by my standards. However, he came in here basically asking what other people's standards are. Now he knows. Those of us who have different standards and have expressed them shouldn't now be chastised for them. In short, get off your fucking high horse.

[Jak]

I think the point is that he shouldn't be shocked. By asking the question "Is this legal, moral, ethical..." he implies that he recognizes there is a distinction between those terms. The fact that he is "shocked" that a significant percentage of people think his actions were immoral makes me wonder where, if anywhere, he actually draws the line between legality and morality. If he doesn't think there is such a line, then he shouldn't care what other people think, and therefore shouldn't have bothered asking the question, unless of course he's just looking to collect some attaboys (which is just kind of pathetic).

Yeah, I agree with that. I was just saying that, maybe, he was not sure what people would say, so he made the thread. I mostly think that he wanted the "nice play" from people, but anyways, I guess I should have read some of the thread.

[Cait_Sith]

I don't expect other people to live by my standards. However, he came in here basically asking what other people's standards are. Now he knows. Those of us who have different standards and have expressed them shouldn't now be chastised for them. In short, get off your fucking high horse.

There is no high horsemanship here. I do not do tricks like that most of the time. I am not chastising anyone, I am actually just stating simple fact.

In high level tournaments people play to win. Winning involves drawing on every resource possible. If sly tricks are applicable, then they use them. If they are not for what ever reason, then they do not.

It is simple fact. Complex bluffing is inherent to this game. Whether people choose to avail themselves of it nor not isn't my concern.

[Raider Bob]

- Just win baby -

No one remembers second place, no one cares is you played fair in everyones eyes (Short of Cheating) all peopke really care about is who made top 8, what busted ass new deck fell out of the new set. If your not videotaping your opponets defensive coach or trying to confuse him your just not trying hard enough.

[DragoFireheart]

Fuck all this "that's mean" or "that's lowball" shit. He fucked up. I'd be willing to bet I've won just as many, if not more games from my opponent being a shitty player than me being a decent one.

Hell yes. Many a time I won because my opponent screwed the **** up.

[Volt]

It is interesting to note that real, live, actual cheating is a fairly significant problem at all levels of Magic, from FNM to the Pro Tour. I think this stems from the same loose moral code that makes people think it's perfectly okay - commendable even - to run a line of bullshit at their opponents to distract them from paying their upkeep costs.

I come from a world of competitive Scrabble (don't laugh; it's no sillier than competitive Magic) where players aren't allowed to speak during their opponent's turn, and cheating is virtually non-existent. I was a perennial top 20 player for many years, and I won many high level tournaments. Bluffing exists in that game (i.e. playing intentional phony words), so I don't need any lectures about bluffery.

I realize people want to make the obvious analogy to poker, where it is commonplace (and very entertaining for tv viewers) for players to talk, lie, bluff, etc. while their opponents are thinking. I prefer to make the analogy to golf. Do you ever see Tiger Woods talking trash while Phil Mickelson is making his swing?

Again, I'm not saying everyone should live up to my standards. I'm just saying there are other standards that are just as legitimate, and that by posing the question he did in the OP, the author should be open-minded to them rather than "shocked" that not everyone is patting him on the back and saying "Way to go!"

[Hoojo]

I figure if it's not illegal, then it's not immoral either.


In real life, no, but in the competative world of sports, hell yes!

To supplement Raider Bob's quote:

Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing.
-Vince Lombardi

I like what Nightmare said. Magic is a social sport, but there is no reason to play in a tournament if you aren't playing to win. The way I see it, you EARNED that victory by spotting a slim chance and seized it. Not reminding your opponent of the trigger isn't bad sportsmanship. Reminding them is being a good person, not a good sport.

[Volt]

I love how people on the other side of this debate keep wanting to equate the wussified stance of 'Always remind your opponent to pay his upkeep costs' to the more reasonable stance of 'Don't at any time go out of your way to verbally distract your opponent during gameplay.' I am not saying you should coddle your opponent. I'm just saying you shouldn't make an ass of yourself to win at a game of cards. To quote myself from the last page:


You can bet that I will gladly take the win if my opponent forgets to pay for his Pact. I may even sit there silently wishing for him to forget. What I will not do is go out of my way to distract the guy and try to force him to to forget. That just strikes me as undignified. I'm not saying it's illegal. Obviously, it isn't. I'm just saying that's where I draw the line. I don't want to win that badly at a game of Magic.

Anyways, I realize I'm in the minority on this, and I will not prevail against the false machismo of the so-called "Win at any costs" crowd.

[Cait_Sith]

You seem to imply that the idea of "winning is winning" is just some sort of "manly" thing. It is not. Fundamentally there is winning and there is losing. Nothing else. The idea of a "runner up" or a "moral victory" or "being nice" is entirely an invented notion.

In the given situation, the person sought to win. He used the best resource he had at his disposal, his opponent's lack of self control, and managed to come out ahead. For all intents and purposes, that is all.

[Volt]

The entirety of human civilization is made up of invented notions. Invented notions have importance.

[frogboy]

Too bad the pluralization doesn't make sense here. You can only have one collective vagina. :)

hey, fuck you, all right?

[Janos_Wuryon]

To throw some more gas on this little fire I have to say this. Any of you who say you wouldn't seize such an opportunity are 100% full of it. if youre spot in a t8 DLD or a spot in day 2 at a GP is on the line you would all, to a man, take any chance to get a win. I think the only difference here is I took the opportunity to create a win through my own actions wher you all strike me as the kind who would sit and pray for some pathetic technicality to try and screw me out of a win. Ive seen it before from people, they talk a good game about sportsmanship but if the chips are down they try all manner of weasely things to win. I will talk my opponent into a mistake all day long but you'll never catch me jumping on some rules technicality to get him a game loss or to turn a game in my favor..

[cupajoe]

Here's my question to the original poster

Do YOU feel good about the way you won?

Would you ever do it again?

Does the win to you personally feel different from winning in a more traditional way?

Did your thoughts about your sportsmanship of the play change from immediately after it happened to now?

Notice I'm not asking you whether you believe theoretically, it's OK for someone to do what you just did, or the legalities of it (clearly it's legal).....I'm asking you how you feel about the manner in which you won....

[FoolofaTook]

I'm not sure what the controversy here is about. There's a clear regulation that says that both players are equally responsible for maintaining a valid game state. Nothing in this situation involved an invalid game state. There's absolutely no requirement for a player to help his opponent by reminding him to take actions that benefit him within a valid game state.

It's possible that there should be a regulation against incessant chatter during a player turn. I could see motormouth turning into a disqualifying event and I wouldn't care less. Pottymouth, being inappropriate communication, I believe CAN be a disqualifying event at the discretion of the judge.

In this case the opponent just forgot to do something that had a penalty, maybe because he was distracted or maybe not, and then paid the appropriate penalty.

[DeathwingZERO]

To throw some more gas on this little fire I have to say this. Any of you who say you wouldn't seize such an opportunity are 100% full of it. if youre spot in a t8 DLD or a spot in day 2 at a GP is on the line you would all, to a man, take any chance to get a win. I think the only difference here is I took the opportunity to create a win through my own actions wher you all strike me as the kind who would sit and pray for some pathetic technicality to try and screw me out of a win. Ive seen it before from people, they talk a good game about sportsmanship but if the chips are down they try all manner of weasely things to win. I will talk my opponent into a mistake all day long but you'll never catch me jumping on some rules technicality to get him a game loss or to turn a game in my favor..

You know what, I've been there, and I didn't. Round 3 at a 5 round event for Power in 1st and 2nd place, and I was playing against a Dragon opponent. He put more than enough mana into his mana pool during a combo, decided to stop at some point because he already had me under a lock, and wanted to end the turn. I reminded him of his mana pool, and he went back through and played it out to kill me.

So ya, looks like your wrong with that one. I'm all about being a talker and using the tricks in Poker, because it's integral. But in paper Magic when I know I don't have a way out, I'll just plan on game 3. If my opponent slips up on something as simple as a reminder, I'll remind them, and tell them that there's plenty out there who wouldn't, so he better get used to doing something with them.

[Cait_Sith]

The entirety of human civilization is made up of invented notions. Invented notions have importance.

However, basic statements of reality are not acts of machismo, but basic statements of reality.

Reality > Dreams in our world.

[boris13]

About what Volt said about chastsing you all are chastsing Janos so you shouldn't be complaining about it happening to you.

The man should have a put a counter on his deck, everyone does it with Aether vial and thoses that don't they learn next time. Theres notting wrong about people talking to your opponet to distract them. I see this happen a lot when people are trying to figure out something, their opponet starts talking to them or shuffles around the cards in their hand to distract them. In short everyone does what something to distract their opponet even if you think you are or not.

[DeathwingZERO]

Shuffling around cards loudly is a distraction, and "tapping" them into each other at the corners to make loud noises is a distraction. But some people actually shuffle cards around in their hands as a way of a thought process, or subconsciously.

Personally, I fully believe that there should be no talking to your opponents about their plays allowed until the match is over. There's absolutely no reason for it, and while what Akki was sourcing from the books seems perfectly fine, it really shouldn't be a part of the game in the first place.

There's plenty of plays to psych out your opponent without verbally annoying them. Hell, he could have just as easily forgotten to pay for the upkeep anyways, as it was probably pretty damn obvious to him that he was the one with the upper hand.

Just because it's a tactic that's used and a tactic that the DCI cannot prevent (and therefor must allow), doesn't mean that it's anywhere near as sporting as just taking the loss you otherwise fully deserve had the player remembered the card.

[Artowis]

Just because it's a tactic that's used and a tactic that the DCI cannot prevent (and therefor must allow), doesn't mean that it's anywhere near as sporting as just taking the loss you otherwise fully deserve had the player remembered the card.

Should I remind the guy about in-game abilities or triggers he's missing too? Fuck should I just tell him the best play?

Seems like a pretty ridiculous stance.

[Di]

Should I remind the guy about in-game abilities or triggers he's missing too? Fuck should I just tell him the best play?

Seems like a pretty ridiculous stance.

Of course you should do that. We are all supposed to be nice guys on God's green earth. And as always, nice guys finish last.

Fortunately, I'm not a nice guy. And if you are, then why in the hell are you playing the game anyway? You can go have more fun playing checkers against yourself, because you'll probably see a better outcome there than in Magic.

[Volt]

It is possible to have class and still finish first.

Just to be clear, even I don't agree with your stance, Deathwing. I'm not going to remind my opponents to pay their non-mandatory upkeep costs, or that they still have mana in their mana pool, or whatever.

[DeathwingZERO]

If your going to bother telling the guy EXACTLY how to play out his turn, then why not also clue him into the fact he may want to remember something? He already reminded him to untap, draw, and swing into the win, I don't see how reminding him there's something he needs to take care of at some point in his turn him any less of a douche.

Again, I'm not saying anybody needs to play like me. And honestly, I don't care. If I had the dedication to be on the Pro Tour, it wouldn't change how I played, and honestly, it wouldn't affect my records, because most players at that level don't get psyched out that badly, or just flat out wouldn't listen to you.

But if your honestly going to assume a tactic like this actually works on any level higher than against your average scrub tournament player, and actively use it, then you'll be getting your ass served back to you repeatedly, and probably failing to put up any results on your own anyways.

[Jak]

Personally, I would not remind him of anything, but I wouldn't say anything to make him forget either. It is one thing to make him forget like the way the OP did, but I wouldn't mind him forgeting and me getting the win. It would be his fault if he forgot. I just don't feel it is right to use tactics to make so one forget something they would have remebered.

Edit- Hell yeah %))! (500!)

[Versus]

I got tricked in a match this weekend. Was playing Doran Control against Teachings. Had him at 13 Life with Teeg, a 5/6 Goyf, and Garruk at 4 loyalty on the board. I knew what was in his hand and sat there for a minute deciding what to do. I was going to make a 3/3 Beast and attack with Goyf and Teeg when he says "You can win this turn, just do the math". I rethought it out, knew he couldn't make a Factory Token to block, knew he couldn't transmute Tolaria for Slaughter Pact, and decided to remove the 4 counters from Garruk (for +3/+3 Overrun) and attack for 13. He killed Teeg in responce with a Vesuva that had copied a Mouth of Ronom many turns back.

I won the game anyway, but I wasn't pissed at all that he did what he did. In fact it was a great lesson learned. I was already up one game against a deck I thought I could never beat and let my confindence get the better of me.

[T is for TOOL]

I, too, have an amazing story about Jedi Mind Trix at a FNM tournament. So there was this really shady kid participating in the draft at the table. He seemed shady mostly because he had a lazy eye (and he has a well-known reputation as an awful player and cheater). During the draft, extra cards went missing from some packs, and multiple copies of awful commons appeared in the packs after they'd been opened and passed around.

So skipping ahead in the story, I end up paired against this guy. The game seems to be going alright, until we reach a point in the midgame where he has one card in hand. I look back at my hand to figure out my play, and when I look up, he has three cards in hand. Now, I'm no mathematician, but from what I remember in school, 3 != 1. I made my play for the turn, and passed to him, keeping careful watch on his side of the board for schenanigans. He draws for the turn, going up to 4 cards in hand and plays a land, back down to 3. He attacks and after combat I write down my new life total. I look back up and he has five cards in hand. O SNP! The turn passes back to me, and I draw, go through all of my phases, and pass back to him. You're clever Mr. Lazyeye, but I'll show you what's what! During his draw phase, he lowers his hand toward his library, and draws his card. Then, he quickly slides 2 more cards off the top of the deck into his hand. I again ask how many cards he has in hand. Eight. Hmm. Using my fingers to do some calculations, I quickly determine that 8 - 5 = 3, and 3 != 1. Ah HA! With my solid mathematical evidence backing me, I intended to expose the crimes, unfortunately leaving myself completely unprepared for his Jedi Mind Trick defense.

Me: You just drew 3 cards this turn.
Him: No, I didn't.

Damn. DAMN! I was sure that he had drawn 3 cards, but he denied it. It was only sometime later after I returned home that I realized he'd been lying. I got JMTed. He got me. He got me good. Well played Mr. Lazyeye, well played.


I won the game anyway, but I wasn't pissed at all that he did what he did. In fact it was a great lesson learned. I was already up one game against a deck I thought I could never beat and let my confindence get the better of me.

You would have learned a great lesson if you had lost because of your mistake. Also, had you lost, I doubt you'd be having such a positive outlook about the experience.

[Finn]

Should I remind the guy about in-game abilities or triggers he's missing too?...Unless I am mistaken, this is actually part of the rules, the triggers I mean. If a trigger occurs (unless it says "may"), both players are responsible for acknowledging it to avoid an illegal game state. So yes. You should remind him. This represents the far end, though. It certainly is a judgement call in most cases. I say, as the stakes get higher, so should your expectation of opponents trying to snow you.

[Versus]

You would have learned a great lesson if you had lost because of your mistake. Also, had you lost, I doubt you'd be having such a positive outlook about the experience.

Indeed. I would have been slightly more bitter, but at myself. To make it even worse (had he won) with my deck being pretty soild against most forms of Agrro, I tuned the SB specifically for Teachings and other Control variants.

Either way, that won't happen again. It's difficult when you've been playing with the same people Friday after Friday. They start to become friends and you let your guard down. It becomes too casual. Not that winning FNM is dreadfully serious to begin with, but if I can get some games in and end up getting a couple free packs in the process, I might as well stay focussed. It's good practice none the less.

[cdr]

I thought I'd post this for everyone:



If my opponent has a Counterbalance in play, I play a spell, and he forgets (or at least, appears to forget) to resolve the trigger and flip a card, do I need to let him know afterwards?

I have definitely faced off against Counterbalances that might as well have been blank cards, because my opponents forget to use them multiple times in a game. Whenever they do, I do whatever I can to not tip them off about the miss. If this is cheating, I obviously need to know very badly.

Triggered abilities do get confusing since there's such a variety of conditions.

Counterbalance has an optional effect ("may") while Pact's is mandatory with a consequence ("If you don't...").

Basically, for any situation in Section 123 that says "issue no penalty", you do not have to remind your opponent. There are currently two.

For an optional trigger that doesn't target, you do not have to remind your opponent ("If the trigger instruction is optional ('may') and specifies no consequence for not doing it, assume that the player has chosen not to perform the instruction and issue no penalty.")

The other type are triggers that "require no choices to be made and have no effect on the visual representation of the game". You can pump your Kami of the Hunt up and not remind your opponent that it's 5/5 until it matters (when it deals or takes damage, etc), or not remind your opponent of his Mana Drain trigger until he mana burns.

For any trigger that targets, optional or no, you must remind your opponent if he forgets because choosing targets is part of putting the trigger on the stack. In this case you are effictively reminding him to put the trigger on the stack.

For other situations, including Pact, you must remind your opponent immediately after the trigger is missed. And call a judge since it involves a penalty. Yes, you do get a Warning for forgetting a Pact.

[troopatroop]

1. STFU other than announcing your plays, phases and passes in this game and don't tell ME what to do, i'll interupt you and tell you this if you do, because i *suspect* you of shenanigans.

... Welcome to the Source.