Basically this. I never have seen him play or anything so I can't pass judgement, but assuming the OP is a true story that is definitely cheatingQuote:
Originally Posted by alphastryk
Printable View
Basically this. I never have seen him play or anything so I can't pass judgement, but assuming the OP is a true story that is definitely cheatingQuote:
Originally Posted by alphastryk
I'm pretty positive Rock isn't a cheater, and it's possible this whole debacle is partially my fault, even though I wasn't there and didn't tell him to do it. I previously watched a game of his where he got blown out by a Chalice, and I later posted in the Eldrazi thread asking him why he didn't try and sneak a spell through the Chalice since it was basically his only out. I didn't tell him to instantly resolve said spell without passing priority, and I'm pretty sure he was just misinformed. He is not a cheater, that's definitely a bold, rash statement to make.
My eyes hurt.
So, how come that while discussing a clear cheat (obfuscating game state via extremely fast moves that are meant to leave no time to respond), people jump out of the woods "hey, you may play spells into Chalice"?
Yes, of course, thanks for info. But you know that the trouble lies in the fact that the dude tried to not let the opponent any time to respond?
This is not about spells been thrown into Chalice to feed Goyf.
This is not about opponent not paying attention to his CotV
This is about dude that simply (and moreover childishly) tries to win with a pathetic cheat.
I'm not sure if it happend like described and if that Luke Rond or whoever needs to be jailed, maybe it all happened in a totally differnet way, but what the OP described is a cheat.
"But you may cast spells into opponent's Chalice, it's his duty to take care of triggers, moreover you may just build threshold, and blah blah blah..."
People are missing they key point of the story, true or not.
Playing into an opponent's Chalice in hopes that they will forget the trigger? Clever use of the rules, like it or not. They way they're written you're good to go.
Key point is that the opponent in this instance didn't forget the trigger. They operated the game state 100% as they should and were left in a disadvantageous position because of it. That's it. All this nonsense about to Chalice or not is beyond the heart of the argument.
If you as a player forget zero of your triggers, then zero of your triggers should be missed, regardless of what your opponent does.
Here's the post I was referring to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HammafistRoob
This statement forgets the narrative though.Quote:
Originally Posted by PirateKing
ALLEGEDLY: The dude tries to resolve a Brainstorm under Chalice and when his opponent reminds him of his CotV the guy actually asks the judge if he could have resolved it IF HE PLAYED FASTER. Judge said "NO." He went and resolved a Crop Rotation by speed-playing anyway, after talking to a judge about resolving spells under Chalice -- and seriously only gets a warning after having the nerve to ask if he can just get away with missing triggers if he plays them too fast for his opponent to call out?
This is operating the game 100% 'as they should'?
I can't read my opponent's mind, but that doesn't prevent me from gauging their intent. He just talked to the judge about why that isn't a legal move -- knowing that Tournament Rules would allow him to resolve the Crop Rotation in spite of his own Chalice of the Void assuming he kicks the game in the ass and fast forwards to a post-resolution board is exactly what defines cheating; you might point to a single rule in this instance, but really all the rules are subject to be in effect at any given time, so it isn't enough to say that he squeaked one by; if there is accuracy to this story, he practically told everyone he was going to break a rule by asking the judge about it, then went right ahead and barely got a wrap on the knuckles. Contextually this is tantamount to banging your cousin only to go, "Oh shit that's right I just got back from my honeymoon. Welp, not supposed to do that again, am I!"
Couldn't an argument be made that this is an attempt to bring manual dexterity into the game, which is one of several reasons why we can't Chaos Orb? We frown on sleight-of-hand during a tournament all the time; the Cheating thread is chock-full of people saying "for God's sake, demonstrate clearly each card you draw from Brainstorm, one at a time." Why's this different, because he can fetch a land faster than someone can draw 3 off the top? Nonsense.
If his opponent actually made some sort of action that suggested the spell resolved, then tried to catch the chalice trigger, then I would say it is a missed trigger, but the fact that he tried to just shortcut through everything,.and after having been called on it twice in the match suggests to me shady play. Like I said, I don't know if the OP is true or not, but for arguments sake I'll assume it is true, and in that case the player is cheating.
"They" being the unnamed person that got cheated, yes. The way it was told, the person had a Chalice at 1, and didn't forget to trigger it on CMC1 spells. Despite this the game moved into a position that shouldn't have come to be through no doing of the unnamed person. They are faultless in this, and that is the problem here.Quote:
Originally Posted by TsumiBand
If you thought I was referring to the named player, you are mistaken.
I feel compelled to ask about responses from my opponent when I make a play. This can allow for your opponent to sometimes make mistakes, that's part of the game. When my opponent tries to pull a fast one on me, and doesn't ask if I have responses: I want to break his legs. And if there weren't laws in this land where this SOB tried cheating me, I would go to my car, get my saw, come back and saw off his fucking legs, leaving him there to bleed out as a warning to any unctuous curs who wished to go about things similarly.
But seriously, if you really want to piss me off at a tournament, cast your crop rotation and start searching without asking me if it's ok.
If only there weren't laws, I would ruthlessly murder people who tried to cheat. Even if it weren't my game. Hell people might even randomly pick up game wins from their opponents cheating and then getting an axe in the head from one of the spectators. Man, I would make the best judge ever.
I am incredibly curious to who this was, and how little information they had about the gamestate or the game. But they couldn't be more wrong about what was happening at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm
First off, Chalice is a trigger that can be missed. A good player will still try to resolve spells even into a chalice if it is their only out hoping that their opponent misses their triggers.
Secondly, The brainstorm situation was entirely not accurate. My opponent said "ok" to my brainstorm, which both of us had been saying for the duration of our 3 games, so I go to start drawing cards, and then my opponent says "wait chalice!" and I look to the judge nexto me, who was watching our games because we were the last match, and say "he said ok, so do I get to resolve brainstorm?" and the judge says "No because you didn't pick up your deck fast enough." This infuriated me because 1. Magic is not a dexterity game and 2. My opponent using the same terminology that we had been using the entire match implied that my spell resolved, and only when I grabbed for my deck with brainstorm then on the stack, did he cry out. I then ask the judge why my speed for reaching for my deck determined if the spell resolved, and asked him if I had reached for it faster then it would have resolved? The judge then backtracks and comes up with a reason he realizes is part of the tournament procedure guidelines rather than his intuitive perception, and says that "ok" on the part of my opponent isn't sufficient reason for a spell to resolve. This is completely accurate, however we had been using the same terminology the entire match, and only when my opponent slipped up did they then take advantage of it. My opponent of course, realizing they could lose the match (as we were in game 3) insists that they were just "acknowledging the spell" with ok, and hadn't decided to resolve their chalice trigger or not. Complete bullshit.
Thirdly, The crop rotation that I resolve through chalice in the next few turns was the same situation, where I announce it, he says "ok" so I jump for my deck. Since the judge is now ruling on MTG being a dexterity based game, I am going to follow the judge's rulings. Always adhere to what the Head Judge demands, even if it is wrong.
Fourthly and lastly, anyone who thinks that going for wins through people missing triggers, something I have no qualms with doing that and will continue to ad nauseam, is morally reprehensible may be correct. But it is not against the rules of MTG. Maintaining your own gamestate is the onus of the player controlling the triggers. This isn't clever use of game mechanics or cheating. It is the rules of competitive play.
I think people forget that Rock Lee has almost single handily brought us Turbo Eldrazi. As an authority on his deck, I doubt he'd put his integrity at risk when he's more than capable of outplaying his opponents.
That's why it' important to hear both sides. The whole story stinked form the very beginning; it'll be nice (if I'd be in the two players place) if the named judge could show up, too.
Also, your story seems reasonable and I like this part:
Seen how this thread leads nowhere, I'm leaving it.Quote:
Thirdly, The crop rotation that I resolve through chalice in the next few turns was the same situation, where I announce it, he says "ok" so I jump for my deck. Since the judge is now ruling on MTG being a dexterity based game, I am going to follow the judge's rulings. Always adhere to what the Head Judge demands, even if it is wrong.
edit: Oh, this is also fine:
Looks like I need to invent a special terminology and/or explicitely ask my opponents what their "ok" and "resolves" and "ok, resolves" mean.Quote:
The judge then... says that "ok" on the part of my opponent isn't sufficient reason for a spell to resolve. This is completely accurate, however we had been using the same terminology the entire match...
And now on I'll want all ppl in our lgs to announce the resolved spells with a "rejoice, this spell of yours has now resolved; the spell officially resolved and it is henceforth known as a resolved spell" phrase.
This to me sounds more likely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rock Lee
I mean, come on - anyone with half a brain in a competitive game of tournament Magic knows you need to give your opponent a chance to respond or acknowledge spells, triggers, activations, etc. If a player forgets their own triggers, that's really their own fault for forgetting. An opposing player should not be punished for their opponents' ineptitude and failure to comprehend the mechanics of what their cards do.
You can ram those cards 100% legally out into Chalice all day and hope your opponent misses the trigger(s). Is it a touch unorthodox? Absolutely. But this is why I wanted to hear both sides of the story. When you cast something, give your opponent a chance to respond and they allow it to do so, it's not your fault your opponent is dozing off during a match. This is why I believe Rock Lee's version of what happened, because it seems like a serious stretch someone with his experience would cast a spell and grab his deck like a twelve year-old with no manners at the kitchen table without at least giving his opponent the courtesy of having priority.
If his opponent said "Yes," well, they moved past the point of no return and it's their own fault for forgetting what the hell their cards do.
I'd agree with you if that were the case, it wasn't. I don't particularly expect him to openly admit to his embarrassing display of character but I know what I saw and it was gross. There wasn't a drop of good sportsmanship on his side of that game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollywood
Jeremiah, you know that your opponent didn't acknowledge that crop rotation. There wasn't any room, your card barely hit the table before you had your deck in hand. It was like watching a storm player combo off in front of an opponent with no hand. He took it like a champ, because he was way ahead and closed out the match but you behaved like a child. I can understand your refusal to respond to his "good game" as not everyone wants to pretend like they're happy after getting shut out by a pox deck but I don't believe for a second that you intended to let him respond to that chalice trigger right after realizing that judge could let you slide as you pointed out above.
You may be correct, if the head judge allows your match to be played in a way that it shouldn't otherwise be played then you may be within your rights to do so. Does that make it right, though? I'm all about letting opponents miss their triggers, they can make all the mistakes they want if it helps me win but I wouldn't take away their ability to make a decision.
If a judge handed out a warning next to me for drawing two cards in a draw step, should I pick a few up myself?
There's a fine line between playing your crop rotation into a chalice and waiting for the "OK" and playing your crop rotation into a chalice, resolving it immediately without any response and accepting your punishment if he tells you to stop what you're doing. You pegged that guy and the judge for the type of people that would just let it go and you were correct, that doesn't make it a good thing to do and this game becomes a whole lot worse in general if that type of behavior is tolerated.
This is why the proper verbal response to anything in a tournament is "Wait!" and "Response". If someone asks you 'does it resolve' and you respond with wait/response, they cannot conclude that you do not have responses, whereas if you said 'ok' or something else equally vague/misleading, it can and should actually cost you games.
There was no "does it resolve?"Quote:
Originally Posted by thefreakaccident
*grabs popcorn*
This will be the only reply I have, because I only have one standing hate-battle in MTG since they are inane, pointless, and uninspiring to read, and I have no intention to establish another one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm
Again if you establish who you were, or where you were sitting, I could perhaps think of how/why you are so terribly misinformed about what happened. I do not ignore people's "good game," handshakes, cordial respectful ending of games (with the exception of Dan Hall, bane of all that possesses virtue) and never have. Ask the myriad persons who I play against, I always maintain a positive and upbeat demeanor. Granted sometimes I use that demeanor to leverage advantages, but only against highly competitive opponents, and lets be honest, my Pox Opponent in Goffstown, NH wasn't. We even spoke about how he has recently returned to playing competitively. I was entirely furious with the judge however, and spoke with my Pox Opponent even after the match specifically about how I was not upset with them at all, but with the head judge for ruling incorrectly.
Regarding the Crop Rotation, you think there was no response, I say there was a response.
Regarding my closing remarks, you think I stymied him, I say I spoke with him for 5-6 minutes afterwards.
Regarding your interpretation of the head judge, you and I both differ.
No purpose in trying to ferret out who is right/wrong, I know where I stand, and I am confident in it. Flame/Troll on if you wish.
That's why you do it vehemently if they do not give you the chance. Put your hands up, "Look buddy! You didn't give me the chance to respond" or the ever classic, "JUDGE!!!" at the top of your lungs. You will get your response phase, as long as you want it, and can communicate so. When you do respond, make sure it is clearly stated and understood by all parties. If you need to ask about proper phrasing from a judge, it may feel silly, but it is better than feeling silly later having lost the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm
Carry something around with you to shove in your opponent's face if you need extra time to respond, like a mop, or a puppet, or a muppet, or something.
According the latest update to the missed triggered ruling I could find (I checked this time), your logic cannot hold true given how fast the errors were caught with Chalice of the Void. If I am mistaken, please feel free to point the Wizards statement that would make the following false.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rock Lee
"Now, your responsibilities as the opponent are the same across different types of tournaments. If a triggered ability is forgotten (or any other game error is made) and the error is discovered later, players should alert the judge. The judge will try and fix the error if possible and, if not, the game will just continue."
Source
The judge was right, you didn't resolve your spells fast enough, but not in terms of physical movement, but in terms of making the game state irreparable to "unresolve" them. The only way your logic would hold is if Chalice of the Void was a may ability.