Jedi Mind Tricks

[Ziveeman]

I was playing in an M10 draft awhile back against a pretty good player. Earlier in the game I had casted an Unsummon on his Beserkers of Blood Ridge in response to an Oakenform targeting it.

After that, I had casted an Ant Queen on six lands (three Forests, three Islands), and the turn after that I cast an Air Elemental. However, when I was tapping the mana, I tapped two Islands, then was about to tap the third one but then I mumbled "no.." and then proceeded to tap all of my Forests, leaving only an Island untapped.

I did this because in an earlier game he had cast Earthquake. If he cast Earthquake on me this game, I would have been screwed as I was holding two lands in my hand.

Turns out he actually did have Earthquake in his hand the whole time but was afraid that I had another Unsummon in my hand so he didn't cast it. That won me the game

[cdr]

I and my opponent shuffle up before the match. He throws the die but only glances at it before continuing to shuffle. I throw the die for a lower number but say with full confidence "I'll go first.".
He looks a little confused but then says "Ok."

I was afraid of stuff like this in a thread like this.

Let me reiterate what Nightmare said and be clear that you were in fact lying about the outcome of the die roll, and you should have been disqualified for Cheating - Fraud.

You didn't specifically say that you won the roll, but you blatantly implied that you had - there's no difference.

If you want to attempt "Jedi Mind Tricks", you better know the rules. Read and understand the Communication section of the MTR.

4.1 Player Communication
Communication between players is essential to the successful play of any game that involves virtual objects or hidden information. While bluffing may be an aspect of games, there need to be clear lines as to what is, and is not, acceptable for players to say or otherwise represent. Officials and highly competitive players should understand the line between bluffing and fraud. This will confirm expectations of both sporting and competitive players during a game.

...

The following rules govern player communication:
• Players may not represent derived or free information incorrectly.
• Players must answer completely and honestly any specific questions pertaining to free information.
• At Regular REL, all derived information is instead considered free.

The Riki Rules – Profane Bluffs

[heroicraptor]

I was afraid of stuff like this in a thread like this.

Let me reiterate what Nightmare said and be clear that you were in fact lying about the outcome of the die roll, and you should have been disqualified for Cheating - Fraud.

You didn't specifically say that you won the roll, but you blatantly implied that you had - there's no difference.

What if you say "I want to go first." If they say "ok", then isn't that the same as them saying "I'll go second/draw first"?

[cdr]

If you're saying it with the intent to misrepresent the result of the die roll, you're Cheating, period.

[Nightmare]

There's a HUGE difference between saying something like:

"You'll draw first, right?"

and

"I'll play first."

If you can't see the difference, you should stop trying to "outwit" your opponent.

And by the way, if they say yes to the first, they still have the opportunity to recognize that you've said something they didn't expect to hear, and say they're playing first.

[Nihil Credo]

If you're saying it with the intent to misrepresent the result of the die roll, you're Cheating, period.

Isn't that a wide interpretation of "misrepresenting"? statements such as "I want to go first" or "I'd like to go first" are both true and misleading, which is common in many accepted bluffs.

(Just to be clear: I think it's obvious that simply "I go first" is lying and cheating.)

For example, let's take Chapin's famous bluff of saying "I'll cast Profane Command and give fear to all my legal targets" right before swinging with an army that included a Chamelon Colossus (pro-black). This, too, is an instance of only stating true facts with the clear intent of misrepresenting the game state, making the opponent think that all your guys have fear even though both the public information and your words reveal that Colossus can still be chumped; just like someone saying "I'd like to go first" is trying to make his opponent think that he lost the die roll even though the number is right in his face.

So,

1) If I remember correctly, when Chapin told the story of his bluff there was debate about whether it was sportsmanlike but no serious question of its legality. Is this no longer true (or am I remembering wrong)?

2) If the Chapin bluff is legal, how would you characterise the difference between that bluff and "I'd like to go first"?

[Michael Keller]

Just read konsultant's sig. That's the only Jedi trick I remember using.

[cdr]

The Chapin situation is definitely different.

Chapin is saying something both very precisely true and general which his opponent does not read enough into. He is walking the finest possible line, but on the side of within the rules.

In Manhattan's case, he knows his opponent is not paying attention to the die roll, so he says something that he knows his opponent will take to indicate that Manhattan won the roll. There is no generality here - Manhattan is saying something false. He can't say what both players know he's saying without having won the roll, and he did not.

Something like "I'd like to go first." comes closer to the line, but probably still on the wrong side.

Edit: "I'd like to go first." probably a closer call than I thought at first. You're still likely going to get kicked out of an event one way or another if you get caught at it.

[Manhattan]

So to summarize asking your opponent wether you may go first is ok, but stating that you go first is not. Is that fairly accurate? Well in that case I have nothing left but to apologize to my opponent.

[Solpugid]

My friend and I were playing a casual game about 4 or 5 years ago (it was right as Saviors of Kamigawa came out). I was playing a simple UG madness deck, my friend was playing a GW token-based deck.

Mid-way through the game, my back was against the wall. I had a few rootwallas and aquamoebas out, but was staring down a rather substantial army of chump-blockers. Then, like clockwork, I drew a wonder off the top. I glanced down at my lands and noticed that my only sources of blue were yavimaya coasts and Oboro, palace in the clouds. I had an island in my hand, but was holding it to bluff a rushing river or circular logic.

My only legitimate way to win was to start going on the offensive, but my friend was playing 4x living wish with a silklash spider in the board. He had a few cards in hand, so I made the only play I thought could work. I pitched wonder to aquamoeba and swung confidently with my team. To my delight, my friend had become so used to "wonder in grave=flying" that he let them all through, knocking him down to about 5 or 6 life after pumps.

When I passed the turn, he smiled, played living wish, and got his spider. He played the thing and pseudo-hurricaned for a bunch, tapping out. I explained to him that my creatures didn't have flying and received a rather unamused look. I attacked the next turn for the win (this time with an island in play).

[MMogg]

So to summarize asking your opponent wether you may go first is ok, but stating that you go first is not. Is that fairly accurate? Well in that case I have nothing left but to apologize to my opponent.

I think the line is between a question and a statement because under the rules, whoever wins the die roll (in this case your opponent) was the one who makes the decision; yet, you made a statement that you'll go first, implying it was your decision, implying you won the roll. "I want", on the other hand, does not exactly mean it is your decision, but the connotation is still quite strong. I mean, after all, when we go to a restaurant we say "I want a pizza" and we expect it. It's not like saying I want a night in bed with twin porn stars; it's in the realm of possibility, hence a very fine line.

[goobafish]

I think I see movement to my right (where some friends were observing) and catch Dave Caplan ushering Lam Phan from the area.

You are lucky I did. He is notorious for blurting out things at the wrong time :P.

[Parcher]

You are lucky I did. He is notorious for blurting out things at the wrong time :P.

That was why you asked me to keep him away from the Top 8 at Chicago? I just thought you hated asians.

[elof]

A famous jedi mind trick is to Circular Logic a spell without or with few cards in the graveyard. Most people see Logic as a hardcounter.

[Waikiki]

new players actually read that cards and check your grave :<

[georgjorge]

That's an interesting point...some mind tricks actually work better against experienced players than against new ones, as the new ones haven't yet developed "instinctive" reactions to certain cards, and NEED to think the situations through instead.

[Tangle.Wire]

Last Sunday i played on a Legacy Tournament UGR Dreadstill facing an Eva Green, we where post board and he played a second turn dark confidant i had no solutions only a single firespout on hand so on his third turn he revealed another confidant with his confidant which was already played. I asked him "on eva green its possible to drop 2 confis to race controlplayers right?" (forcing him to play it) as he did i hardly got problems grinning like the players around us when i just played the firespout on my turn removing both confidants :D


On the same tournament i lost to an exalted angel as i thought morph couldn't be countered so you can choose what story blames a player more


ps: We already started a discussion about mind tricks especially on daze in the Dreadstill thread as i dont play daze anymore just relaying on the bluff that i could have one as everyone would expect daze on a countertop/dreadstill deck.

[Skeggi]

On the same tournament i lost to an exalted angel as i thought morph couldn't be countered so you can choose what story blames a player more

502.26a Morph is a static ability that functions in any zone from which you could play the card it’s on, and the morph effect works any time the card is face down. “Morph [cost]” means “You may play this card as a 2/2 face-down creature, with no text, no name, no subtypes, no expansion symbol, and no mana cost by paying rather than its mana cost.” Any time you could play an instant, you may show all players the morph cost for any face-down permanent you control, pay that cost, then turn the permanent face up. This action does not use the stack. (See rule 504, “Face-Down Spells and Permanents.”)

If you're referring to a situation where you want to stifle the turning face-up of the card, then indeed, that's not counterable. If you're referring to an Exalted Angel being cast face down, yes that's counterable.

[Tangle.Wire]

If you're referring to a situation where you want to stifle the turning face-up of the card, then indeed, that's not counterable. If you're referring to an Exalted Angel being cast face down, yes that's counterable.

Yeah i already know this yet :D but i was 100% sure so don't even called for a judge just hold my force on the hand getting told from everyone why i didn't counter the angel after this game ^^

[Digital Devil]

This happened before M10. I was playing Angel Stompy, and had an Exalted Angel on the battlefield, versus a BGW Aggro Rock deck. My opponent drew a Doran, the Siege Tower, with Dark Confidant, going down to 5. I was @1. My opponent thinks a little about his move, then I say: "What are you thinking about? Just drop that beatstick and kill me the next turn. If you attack, I can block Doran, but before I gain life from Angel, I lose the game 'cause Confy kills me...". He drops Doran, then passes the turn. I swing for 5 and win.