Good Game: Beware the Dark Side

[waterboytkd]

This thread is for the discussion of my latest article, Good Game: Beware the Dark Side. We would be grateful if you would let us know what you think, but please keep your comments on topic.

[The Ice King]

Great article, i still disagree that Chapin crossed the line, but i will let the dead horse die.

The one thing in your article i think may be wrong is your second example of free information. With the Tarmogoyf example, if an opponent asks how strong that Goyf (or any other creatures that has a modified power), the controller has to answer the question, or visably show. I assume it would be unsportsmanlike to just say "figure it out". But i could be wrong.

[akiratheoni]

Good article, I enjoyed reading it.

I had this situation happen to me awhile ago: I was playing against a Spring Tide deck and he began to combo off. I knew I was doomed (this was third turn) so I cast a Pact of Negation on his High Tide. He asked me what it did, so I said "A free counterspell". He thought for a second, about to counter it with Force of Will, but at the last minute changed his mind and cast a Twincast instead, copying the Pact of Negation to counter my own. I sort of was like 'wuh...' to myself, but I let it go. He actually ended up NOT combing off, and passed the turn to me. I took my turn, then let him go, and told him that he needed to pay 3UU or he lost the game. He only had three Islands in play, and was unable to, and thus he lost. It was THEN that he read the Pact of Negation.

Although he didn't accuse me of cheating, I had mixed feelings about the win, but I felt that I didn't need to tell him the second clause of the card since it was printed right there and he could have just read it. Although I know now that I didn't technically cheat, what do you guys think? Should I have told him the second clause, or no? According to the article, I didn't have to (look at the Magma Spray example).

[Shadowin]

And to think of all the times I've freely given away info. Actually, most of that was lower REL tournaments, so it was probably free information anyway.

[Kitty Rocca]

According to rule number 409.1c

"409.1c If the spell or ability requires any targets, the player first announces how many targets he or
she will choose (if the spell or ability has a variable number of targets), then announces his or
her choice of an appropriate player, object, or zone for each of those targets."

Since there was an X casting cost he needed to actually say how many targets. Which he didn't, he said All which was an incorrect value of targets. Also all his legal targets were any creature on the board that did not have pro-black. This rule seems pretty clear to me.

[ST218]

...and shortuts are permissable. By that reasoning, when there's one creature out and you play Path to Exile and don't say who you're targetting, the other guy should call a judge on you.

As long as both players understand what's going on and the action isn't actually illegal, it's fine. Chapin said "all my legal targets". If he'd done a hand wave over his side of the board, would that have been okay? Or does he have to point to each one, otherwise it's illegal? Does he have to say that it's the ones he controls, or is he fine just implying it's his creatures?

Magic rules aren't meant to degenerate into games of minutia where the challenge isn't against the opponent's skill, but in enumerating every step exactly so you don't get slapped with a game loss. That's why we have shortcuts, and that's why some things are understood. That's why when you play Shock on the first turn you don't have to point out it's not yourself, it's the other guy, and when you say "all my legal targets", regardless of what each individual word or phrase may mean, it's understood what the statement meant.

As for the article, I liked it, as well as the analogy. The powers of the Force are great, but for the inexperienced, the Dark Side holds dangers.

I do wonder-let's say your opponent missed a Bitterblossom token, and it's a bit into his main phase. Do you call a judge and say "hey, that guy missed his token", or do you just remind the guy, make him take his token and life loss, and move on with the turn? On one hand, calling a judge seems like the "right play", especially because if they keep doing it that means a game loss for them. On the other, it seems kinda lame-it's the third or fourth turn, there's a bunch of other things going on, who cares about a missed token?

[Kitty Rocca]

Originally Posted by ST218

...and shortuts are permissable. By that reasoning, when there's one creature out and you play Path to Exile and don't say who you're targetting, the other guy should call a judge on you.

Re-read the rule, path doesn't have a variable cost, whereas profane command does. Thats the problem too many people like to choose which rules they follow as long as it benefits them and take it for granted that their knowledge should be common knowledge. It doesn't work that way, what ever happened to honestly playing and winning honestly? By your reasoning I should just cast a spell and expect them to know what I am targeting.

[Shinjutsei]

Originally Posted by akiratheoni

Although he didn't accuse me of cheating, I had mixed feelings about the win, but I felt that I didn't need to tell him the second clause of the card since it was printed right there and he could have just read it. Although I know now that I didn't technically cheat, what do you guys think? Should I have told him the second clause, or no? According to the article, I didn't have to (look at the Magma Spray example).

You're fine. It's his own fault for not taking it upon himself to read a card that he didn't know. Though you'd think he would've wanted to see why the "free counterspell" was, you know, free.

[kcolloran]

To me the Chapin thing is cut and dry that he was fine. He went out of his way not to use incorrect language. When people start using weird phrases like "all my legal targets", that should set off a warning bell. I'm been playing magic for 15 and I'm pretty certain I've never used such a phrase. Normally we'd say something like "my team" or "all my guys" or something. But that would be inaccurate so he used precise language. If you can't figure out something is up that's too bad.

Now my personal preference isn't usually to make that kind of play. It makes me uneasy as a player. But I understand those are the rules of the game and at any serious event I don't expect my opponents to have mercy on me.

[Nalianna]

How many cards are in your hand? Most players simply answer, because the opponent gets to know. But you don't have to tell them the answer.

um. if my opponent ever conceals his hand size, i'm calling judge. rather rapidly.

[Sulendil]

Kitty Rocca: There's a thing in Magic Tournament that's called shortcut, you know.

Chapin certainly isn't playing nice here, but he isn't violating any known rules, just like the article has pointed out. His opponent should be more careful about that, and just ask away. Having a bit of curiosity would save the poor guy.

[DTrooper]

Nice follow-up arcticle. I enjoy reading this kind of stuff. It does help you become a more competitive player.

I have one case for you guys to figure out.

Last T2 season. GB Elves mirror match. Regionals. This was a long time ago, so I'm a bit foggy about the details, but here's how it was:

We're both relatively low on life, but he has an enormous army of creatures, and I'm clearly behind on board position. I manage to kill his Imperious Perfect, so that is about to change. With my own Perfect and double Bramblewood Paragon making 4/4 Tokens , I am about to alpha-out and win. Though, he gets another Imperious Perfect and a Loxodon Warhammer into play but does not equip because he lacks the mana to both activate the Perfect and equip the Hammer. I see I don't have much time left and have to bluff this play. We have the same number of creatures. I'm at 1. He's at 7. I rip Nameless Inversion. Inversioning one of his creatures wouldn't accomplish much...

But I see a window.

I attack with all my Elves. He blocks every single one of them, except for a 4/4 Token. He wants to have a creature left for the Warhammer. 2 Trample damage is going through, plus the 4 from the token. I think for a long time. Nameless Inversion on the token would also remove his Elf type, making it a 6/0... that dies. But I must win this turn and am hopeful my opponent doesn't notice the clause on Nameless Inversion, but I also must do this in a way it is not considered cheating.
I look at him, wait until he looks back at me, tap two mana, and stand there pointing the Nameless Inversion at the token. "Ok?" - I ask. The opponent responds by groaning, scooping up his cards and saying "Good game.", promptly signing the slip which gave me a 2-1 victory. I responded "Good game." and walked away. I never told this story to anyone, until now.

Now; is this cheating? Did I cross "the line"?

[o'neilll]

"I attack with all my Elves. He blocks every single one of them, except for a 4/4 Token. He wants to have a creature left for the Warhammer. 2 Trample damage is going through, plus the 4 from the token. I think for a long time. Nameless Inversion on the token would also remove his Elf type, making it a 6/0... that dies. But I must win this turn and am hopeful my opponent doesn't notice the clause on Nameless Inversion, but I also must do this in a way it is not considered cheating.
I look at him, wait until he looks back at me, tap two mana, and stand there pointing the Nameless Inversion at the token. "Ok?" - I ask. The opponent responds by groaning, scooping up his cards and saying "Good game.", promptly signing the slip which gave me a 2-1 victory. I responded "Good game." and walked away. I never told this story to anyone, until now.

Now; is this cheating? Did I cross "the line"? [/quote]"

Yah... you kinda did.... I guess it would have been diff if you showed him it without playing it and let him draw his own conclusion and then scoop...

[DTrooper]

Originally Posted by o'neilll

Yah... you kinda did.... I guess it would have been diff if you showed him it without playing it and let him draw his own conclusion and then scoop...

This might be me and my Magic Workstation influence, but when asking "Ok?", I am simply asking if my opponent doesn't want to respond to the spell. His response was picking up his cards and saying I won. I was obviously not going to correct him.

[Binary]

Originally Posted by o'neilll

Yah... you kinda did.... I guess it would have been diff if you showed him it without playing it and let him draw his own conclusion and then scoop...

Nothing in that description constitutes an intentional violation of any rule of the game or any floor rule. He legally played a spell, was clear about the target, and his opponent responded by conceding the game. While it's his responsibility to ensure he's playing his cards correctly, it's not his responsibility to talk his opponent out of an ill-conceived scoop.