Priority and the Stack

[Yare]

This thread is for the discussion of my latest article, Priority and the Stack. We would be grateful if you would let us know what you think, but please keep your comments on topic.

[LAZZOR]

I've been playing for about since Darksteel and I still had questions about the stack but your article finally cleared up all my questions. Good job. I'm looking forward to your next one.

[plarp]

Thankyou for this simple and thorough explanation, it cleared up a few points I didn't understand

[Brutschlund]

Very nice job! You wrote it very clearly and focused. I'd like that you use this "out of scope" comments also, which helps concentrating on the main topic. By the way, this way you do want Maro stated in his recent article not confusing people with things which are not on topic yet. (In your example that would be talking about the combat phase when explaining stack issues is sufficient.)

In my humble oppinion however I don't have any issues with the word "priority". At least I don't know any better. Fortunatly, you are using this unbeloved rules word and don't confuse people with home brewed alternatives like "turn" or "turn structure" which might confuse them when they would hear "priority" in the future.

Problem #2: Player A controls Goblin Hero. During Player A’s turn, Player A passes priority to Player B. Player B plays Brainstorm and Brainstorm resolves. Player B then plays Sudden Shock, targeting Goblin Hero. Player A says he wanted to play Extirpate, targeting the Sudden Shock in Player B’s graveyard. Who is right?

I think in your answer on problem #2 you could have commented the word "resolves" (the one marked in red) a little bit. IMHO it would have made your explanation easier to follow. Something like: "Brainstorm obviously had to resolve for player B because he had no options in his hand. But resolving the Brainstorm forced B losing priority back to player A..." (Maybe stating also that this wouldn't have been a big deal because of that priority ping-pong. But unfortunatly for player B, player A did have a spell with split second handy stopping the ping-pong.)

Just my 2 cents...

[TimoNL]

Great article, nice and clear. But i really missed how to stack replacement effects (if you call it like that). I mean, how does the stacking go when i sacrifice a evoked creature to greater gargadon or when i momentary blink Mangara of Corondor and sensei's divining top tricks.

[Lorgalis]

Good Job! Served me to clear some aspects on priority. A well written article!!

[tiornys]

Originally Posted by TimoNL

Great article, nice and clear. But i really missed how to stack replacement effects (if you call it like that). I mean, how does the stacking go when i sacrifice a evoked creature to greater gargadon or when i momentary blink Mangara of Corondor and sensei's divining top tricks.

Firstly, none of the situations you ask about involve replacement effects. The first involves triggered abilities, while the other two are just neat timing tricks that involve playing multiple abilities/spells without passing priority. Taking them one at a time:

When you evoke a creature, and it comes into play, at least one triggered ability--its sacrifice ability--goes on the stack. If it has a comes into play ability, like Shriekmaw, that also triggers, and goes on the stack at the same time (you choose the order of multiple triggered abilities that you control when they go on the stack simultaneously). If it has a leaves play ability, like Reveillark, that won't trigger just yet. When the sacrifice ability goes on the stack, each player will get priority. To do what you want, you'll need to play Greater Gargadon's ability when you have priority, before the evoke sacrifice resolves. This will remove a counter from GG, and other stuff might happen, and eventually you'll resolve the sacrifice ability, which no longer does anything because you don't have the creature it is referring to in play anymore.

To abuse Mangara of Corondor with Momentary Blink, you take advantage of the fact that you get priority immediately after playing a spell or ability. Play Mangara's ability, which goes on the stack, then, without passing priority, play Blink targeting Mangara. Assuming nothing else happens, Blink will resolve first, removing Mangara from play, and then returning Mangara to play. The game now treats this Mangara as a different permanent than the one that played the ability on the stack, so when that ability resolves, it does not remove Mangara from the game.

The Top trick is similar. By putting the rearrange ability on the stack, and playing the draw ability in response, you get to put the Top on top of your deck, and then look at and rearrange the top three cards, thus potentially burying the top as far as 3 down.

Hope that helped.

t~

[TimoNL]

Awesome, thanks. And I know its not called like that, but i just had to give those tricks a name :P.

[Darth Fishhead]

One point that I think was missed was that obects on the stack do not leave the stack until they resolve or are countered. This is especially important in the case of triggered abilities, which seem to give players the most trouble. (Activated abilities can also be troublesome for the reasons stated in the article, but I have seen them easier to grok.) In kind, the fact that abilities are independant of their sources is important. If you activate a Prodigal Pyromancer, and your opponent Terrors it, the Pyromancer's ability will still resolve, as long as the target is still legal.

Other than those items, great article!!

[pororo]

Very good and usefull article. Keep on writing this kind of articles.

Thanks

[AKICKINTHETEETHFORYOU]

Great article, the only problem being the quality of these players. squire? extirpate you shock? lol. great articile though, cleared up my big issue of being able to brainstorm with something on the stack and then to play the couter you get. thanks.

-J

[bobspil]

This was perhaps the most helpful article I have read in this forum. Very good! I will recomend reading it to a lot of new players who all seem to be confused by priority and stack.

Thanks

[Treefolk]

This was a great article Yare, I look forward to reading your next one -please keep writing.

Player A, with no cards in hand and his two draw spells on the stack underneath Lightning Bolt, is forced to pass priority, so Lightning Bolt resolves, killing Flying Men. Player B has triumphed at last!

Top of stack
Brainstorm
Counterspell (targeting Ancestral Recall)
Ancestral Recall (targeting Player A)
Bottom of stack

After reading this I couldn't stop laughing! I can just imagine a new Magic player who is playing Vintage cheering after he/she has successfully killed the Flying Men!

[Yare]

Originally Posted by Darth Fishhead

One point that I think was missed was that obects on the stack do not leave the stack until they resolve or are countered. This is especially important in the case of triggered abilities, which seem to give players the most trouble. (Activated abilities can also be troublesome for the reasons stated in the article, but I have seen them easier to grok.) In kind, the fact that abilities are independant of their sources is important. If you activate a Prodigal Pyromancer, and your opponent Terrors it, the Pyromancer's ability will still resolve, as long as the target is still legal.

Other than those items, great article!!

Yeah, I thought about including these things, but I had to draw the line somewhere. I guess I could have included another sentence saying something like "whenever something is countered it leaves the stack," but I chose not to for whatever reason.

Originally Posted by Treefolk

This was a great article Yare, I look forward to reading your next one -please keep writing.

After reading this {quote about Flying Men dying} I couldn't stop laughing! I can just imagine a new Magic player playing Vintage cheering after he/she has successfully killed the Flying Men!

I'll tell you what, though. Flying Men on turn 2 with Curiosity enchanting them is pretty scary. Just ask some of my opponents from 2005. Ah, memories.

---

I appreciate all of the praise, guys. I was thinking of doing the next one on the timing of triggered abilities and state-based effects. Is there something you would prefer more? Do you think this is a good idea or not?

[armada]

In Problem #2, is there any sense that the Extirpating player might be being a bit sneaky? After all, he doesn't know he has a reason to Extirpate the Sudden Shock in the graveyard until his opponent announces his intention to play Sudden Shock. Yes, in theory he has a window of opportunity to play Extirpate, but what if he sits there for 20 seconds staring out of the window before the other player announces the Shock? Is it the Shocking player's explicit responsibility to make sure his opponent has no intention of playing anything before announcing his spell?